Politics

Citizens United Positive for Online Disclosure?

By Jake Brewer

My colleague Daniel just shared this excerpt on page 55 of the Citizens United decision. While our team is still pouring over what this decision means for transparency, it seems as though this particular part is very positive for Sunlight’s mission to bring more meaningful online disclosure to bear.

“Shareholder objections raised through the procedures of corporate democracy, see Bellotti, supra, at 794, and n. 34, can be more effective today because modern technology makes disclosures rapid and informative. A campaign finance system that pairs corporate independent expenditures with effective disclosure has not existed before to day. It must be noted, furthermore, that many of Congress? findings in passing BCRA were premised on a system without adequate disclosure. See McConnell, 540 U. S., at 128 (?[T]he public may not have been fully in formed about the sponsorship of so-called issue ads?); id., at 196?197 (quoting McConnell I, 251 F. Supp. 2d, at 237). With the advent of the Internet, prompt disclosure of expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions and supporters. Shareholders can determine whether their corporation?s political speech advances the corporation?s interest in making profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are ? ?in the pocket? of so-called moneyed interests.? 540 U. S., at 259 (opinion of SCALIA, J.); see MCFL, supra, at 261. The First Amendment protects political speech; and disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way. This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages. *****”

Stay tuned for our full analysis.

Full post as published by Sunlight Foundation on January 21, 2010 (boomark / email).