Answering the question, the National Rifle Association submits its brief in support of super PACs in United citizens vs. Federal Election Commission to the<u> judicial branch of the federal government</u>.
The citizens united filed a lawsuit before Supreme Court to stop the federal law commission from preventing it from airing its documentary on Hillary Clinton. The interest group, National rifle association also supported the position of the Citizens united.
<h2>Further Explanation</h2>
However, in 2010, the Supreme Court gave a landmark ruling in support of the citizens united and affirmed that the free speech clause of the first amendment prevents the government from restricting or limiting Independent corporations or organizations from spending on political communications.
The Supreme Court confirmed that political spending is a form of free speech and that the first amendment protected its provision
The Supreme Court decision was hailed as a win for independent cooperation, especially for organizations that have the interest to sponsor a candidate during the electioneering campaign.
The court ruling open door for nonprofit organizations, labor unions, and other large cooperation, the free will to spend money on any candidates of their choice.
Some of the section that was cited by the citizens united is section 203 of BRCA, which it claimed was in total violation of the first amendment right to free speech.
LEARN MORE:
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission brainly.com/question/461715
- To which branch of the federal government did the National Rifle Association submit its brief in support of super PACs in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission brainly.com/question/461715
KEYWORDS:
- supreme court
- citizens united
- federal government
- federal election commission
- super pacs
