Ann Arbor logo
File #: 12-1347    Version: 1 Name: 10/15/12 Citizens United V. Federal Elections Commission
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
File created: 10/15/2012 In control: City Council
On agenda: 10/15/2012 Final action: 10/15/2012
Enactment date: 10/15/2012 Enactment #: R-12-473
Title: Resolution Calling on the United States Congress to Propose and Send to the States for Ratification a Constitutional Amendment to Overturn Citizens United V. Federal Elections Commission and Restore Constitutional Right and Fair Elections to the People
Sponsors: Margie Teall, Sabra Briere, Sandi Smith
Title
Resolution Calling on the United States Congress to Propose and Send to the States for Ratification a Constitutional Amendment to Overturn Citizens United V. Federal Elections Commission and Restore Constitutional Right and Fair Elections to the People
Body
Whereas, The United States Supreme Court in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) recognized the threat to all levels of a republican form of government posed by the corrosive and distorting effects of immense aggregations of wealth accumulated with the help of the corporate form;

Whereas, The United States Supreme Court in Citizens United v. The Federal Election Commission (2010) reversed the decision in Austin, allowing unlimited corporate spending to influence elections, candidate selection, policy decisions and sway votes;

Whereas, Prior to Citizens United decision unlimited independent campaign expenditures could be made by individuals and associations, and such committees operated under federal contribution limits;

Whereas, Given that the Citizens United decision “rejected the argument that political speech of corporations or other associations should be treated differently” because the First Amendment “generally prohibits the suppression of political speech based on the speaker’s identity,” there is a need to broaden the corruption rationale for campaign finance reform to facilitate regulation of independent expenditures regardless of the source of the money for this spending, for or against a candidate;

Whereas, Corporations are legally required to put profits for shareholders ahead of concerns for the greatest good of society, while individual shareholders as natural persons balance their narrow self-interest and broader public interest when making political decisions;

Whereas, The opinion of the four dissenting justices in Citizens United noted that corporations have special advantages not enjoyed by natural persons, such as limited liability, perpetual life, and favorable treatm...

Click here for full text