The End of Campaign Finance Law as We Knew It

Article — Volume 98, Issue 1

98 Va. L. Rev. 1
Download PDF

The Article argues that Citizens United v. FEC ended campaign finance law as we long knew it, but for reasons that have little to do with corporate electioneering. Although the public outcry and legal scholarship have focused on the decision’s narrow effect on corporations, the Article demonstrates how the decision’s broader logic transformed campaign finance law beyond corporate electioneering and led within months to the nearly complete de-regulation of independent expenditures in time for the 2010 elections. Last year’s elections provided only a glimpse of what the Article calls the reverse hydraulics of de-regulation, and as the Article argues, this new de-regulated world of campaign finance is not a better one.

Citizens United therefore is a clear turning point for not just campaign finance law, but for all regulation of the relationship between campaign money and the political process. However, the Article surprisingly concludes in the end that the Supreme Court actually may be sympathetic to alternate forms of regulation of political corruption, notwithstanding Citizens United’s broad skepticism about corruption. Namely, the Court may be much more sanguine toward government regulation of campaign money’s influence when it is structured as ex post regulation of the legislative process on the back end, as opposed to the ex ante structure of campaign finance regulation. Citizens United, when considered in light of other recent Court decisions, point this way forward for campaign finance reform without campaign finance regulation.

Click on a link below to access the full text of this article. These are third-party content providers and may require a separate subscription for access.

  Volume 98 / Issue 1  

The End of Campaign Finance Law as We Knew It

By Michael S. Kang
98 Va. L. Rev. 1

A Consumer Decision-Making Theory of Trademark Law

By Mark P. McKenna
98 Va. L. Rev. 67

To Perform or Pay Damages

By Gregory Klass
98 Va. L. Rev. 143

Response to Markovits and Schwartz

By Seana Shiffrin
98 Va. L. Rev. 159