In a 5-4 vote on Thursday the Supreme Court, with the conservative members in the majority, essentially ended any efforts at restricting the role of corporations in campaigns. 
Specifically, the high Court ruled that restrictions on corporate spending in political campaigns were unconstitutional due to the protections of political speech in the First Amendment to the Constitution.
The ruling basically guts many of the provisions and elements of McCain-Feingold, legislatively known as the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002.
Thanks to the Washington Post, here is a break down of what the ruling left intact and what it eliminated from the law.
What was eliminated:
– prohibiting corporations from using money from their general treasuries to produce and run their own campaign ads for a particular candidate.
– prohibiting corporations paying for and running issue-oriented ads 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election.
What the ruling left intact:
– the banning of corporate donations directly to a candidate and from the corporation’s treasury.
– corporations still must file a report with the FEC stating the identity of anyone who contributed $1000 or more to an ad’s production, when a corporation spends more than $10,000 in a year to produce or air a campaign ad.
– And ads still must have a disclaimer stating who is responsible and if the ad is or is not authorized by a particular candidate or political entity.
Tags: San Francisco injury attorney Brett Burlison discusses supreme court ruling on corporate spending.
