Can Californians Vote on Citizens United? State Supreme Court to Decide

Published: 12 Oct, 2015
3 min read

The California Supreme Court will consider whether or not voters will be allowed to weigh in on the Citizens United v. FEC decision in 2016. The proposed measure is part of an ongoing effort to get Congress to pass a constitutional amendment that would overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's decision.

A similar proposition made headlines in 2014, but the California Supreme Court ruled that it would not appear on the ballot after the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association filed a lawsuit claiming that lawmakers do not have the authority to use "legislative power for a public opinion poll."

The measure itself would have no legal effect even if California voters approved it. The controversial decision is not looked on favorably by many Californians and Americans at large, but federal lawmakers would be obligated to act one way or another based on how state voters respond.

For those unfamiliar with the history of Citizens United, the controversy began in January 2008 when the conservative lobbying group, Citizens United, wanted to air a film called, "Hillary: The Movie." The film was set to be released on the Internet and cable TV.

However, a lower court ruled that this violated the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) because section 203 of the law states, "an electioneering communication as a broadcast, cable, or satellite communication that mentioned a candidate within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary, and prohibits such expenditures by corporations and unions."

The issue was brought to the Supreme Court, resulting in the BCRA provisions being struck down. This means that private corporations, labor unions, and certain special interest groups can spend an unlimited amount of money on these types of political activity.

One public opinion poll shows that 80% of Americans disapprove of the Supreme Court's decision in this case, and widely believe it will only make corruption in Washington worse.

The measure in California that would allow voters to have their say at the ballot box would likely echo this sentiment. However, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association argued that it was an "illegitimate exercise of legislative power," and claimed that placing this initiative on the ballot was an attempt by the Democratic Party to increase voter turnout.

There are many Republicans and Democrats who oppose the Citizens United decision. It already allows for unlimited contributions to political campaigns from private corporations, labor unions, and special interest groups.

Yet, while people talk about the political spending of these groups, the two most influential private corporations in the U.S. - the Republican and Democratic parties -- are raking in a hefty sum in taxpayer-funded support.

IVP Donate

Last year’s federal budget included an amendment that raised the limit on contributions to political parties for both parties to ten times their previous limit.

The discussion of campaign finance and money in politics often revolves around the Citizens United decision. The California measure is meant to send a message, but it could never be anything more than that since a state proposition (one with no legal implications) can't bind Congress to initiate legislation or the amendment process.

Still, the California Supreme Court will determine whether or not the measure will appear on the November 2016 ballot.

Photo Credit: Sean Locke Photography / shutterstock.com

 

You Might Also Like

Ballrooms, Ballots, and a Three-Way Fight for New York
Ballrooms, Ballots, and a Three-Way Fight for New York
The latest Independent Voter Podcast episode takes listeners through the messy intersections of politics, reform, and public perception. Chad and Cara open with the irony of partisan outrage over trivial issues like a White House ballroom while overlooking the deeper dysfunctions in our democracy. From California to Maine, they unpack how the very words on a ballot can tilt entire elections and how both major parties manipulate language and process to maintain power....
30 Oct, 2025
-
1 min read
California Prop 50 gets an F
Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an 'F'
The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation....
30 Oct, 2025
-
3 min read
bucking party on gerrymandering
5 Politicians Bucking Their Party on Gerrymandering
Across the country, both parties are weighing whether to redraw congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Texas, California, Missouri, North Carolina, Utah, Indiana, Colorado, Illinois, and Virginia are all in various stages of the action. Here are five politicians who have declined to support redistricting efforts promoted by their own parties....
31 Oct, 2025
-
4 min read