Search for: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Comm'n" Results 1 - 19 of 19
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jan 2010, 8:58 pm by Larry Catá Backer
Federal Election Commission, 540 U.S. 93 (2003), and earlier with respect to corporate expenditures, in Austin, supra, and non-profit corporations, Federal Election Comm’n v. [read post]
22 Jun 2012, 5:18 am
Federal Election Comm’n, 558 U. [read post]
17 May 2010, 7:19 pm
Federal Election Comm’n, 130 S. [read post]
25 Oct 2012, 6:26 pm by Ron Miller
Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Citizens United v Federal Election Comm’n, has significantly impacted the financing of political campaigns. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 11:14 am by Nate Nieman
Federal Election Comm’n, No. 08-205, slip op. [read post]
22 Jan 2010, 8:50 pm by Clerquette LeClerq
Federal Election Comm'n was announced, in case you happen to have spent the last two days in a dark, Interweb-less hole). [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 1:56 pm by Matthew Bush
Bullock – the Citizens United sequel seeking review of a Montana state law that restricts the political spending options of corporations.  [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 4:54 pm
It goes back to the Schofield decision to ascertain just what those "neutral principles" are:As the Schofield Court recognized:These neutral principles include First Amendment rights of individuals and corporations (see Citizens United v. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 7:53 pm by Jeff Gamso
-----------------*Friday's decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
19 Nov 2010, 2:36 pm
But while a "diocese" may thus be seen as continuous in the eyes of the Episcopal Church, that entity, as well as the entity that departed the Church, are each still governed by, and subject to, the "First Amendment rights of individuals and corporations (see Citizens United v. [read post]