This study analyzes the rationale used by the Supreme Court in the 2010 case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The majority opinion and dissent were dissected and scrutinized for any weaknesses. After careful review and comparison with First Amendment theories and scholarly articles, it was found that the majority opinion and final decision were poorly reasoned and created a dangerous political communication landscape and a weakened Marketplace of Ideas.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:USF/oai:scholarcommons.usf.edu:etd-6107 |
| Date | 01 January 2013 |
| Creators | La Pointe-Aitchison, Corin Shanti |
| Publisher | Scholar Commons |
| Source Sets | University of South Flordia |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | Graduate Theses and Dissertations |
| Rights | default |
Page generated in 0.0011 seconds