Corporate Political Speech: Inspiration From the Landmark U.S. Superme Court Case, Citizens United v. F ederal Election Commission

Since the U.S. Federal Election Campaign Act was promulgated in 1971 , the U.S. corporations have suffered many limitations on their ability to finance or contribute to campaigns because of their corporate identity. With respect to the constitutional controversy aroused by the U.S. Federal Election Campaign Act and its related regulations ，the U.S. Supreme Court has always wavered on whether or not such restriction is infringement of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which seems to bring the dilemma to an end, declaring that corporations also enjoy the rights of campaign finance under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. During 2012 Taiwan presidential election, there have been the most corporate speech flooding into the political campaign, which arouses much public criticism. To solve this problem, inspired by Citizens United, we shall focus on contemplating any localized and practical disclosure systems and relevant disclaimers to alleviate the aforementioned public controversy, but shall not mechanically impose more and more restrictions on corporate political speech or campaign finance.