• Citizens United, Explained (Daniel I. Weiner, Brennan Center for Justice Explainer, 1-29-25)
The Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a controversial decision that reversed century-old campaign finance restrictions and enabled corporations and other outside groups to spend unlimited money on elections.
Citizens United arose in 2007 when a conservative nonprofit organization challenged campaign finance rules that stopped it from promoting and airing a film criticizing then presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
The Supreme Court eventually decided 5–4 that Citizens United was within its First Amendment rights to spend its money disseminating the film. But rather than opining solely on the case before it as it had been asked to do, the Court took the opportunity to entirely strike down century-old prohibitions on corporate “independent” spending — money that doesn’t go directly to a candidate or party. This applied to labor unions as well. Lower courts applying the ruling extended it to invalidate almost all fundraising and spending restrictions for groups that purport to be separate from candidates, many of which are today known as “super PACs.”
• Dark Money Basics (OpenSecrets) Excellent clear explanation.
“Dark money” refers to spending meant to influence political outcomes where the source of the money is not disclosed. Here’s how dark money makes its way into elections:
'Politically active nonprofits such as 501(c)(4)s are generally under no legal obligation to disclose their donors even if they spend to influence elections. When they choose not to reveal their sources of funding, they are considered dark money groups.
'Opaque nonprofits and shell companies may give unlimited amounts of money to super PACs.
While super PACs are legally required to disclose their donors, some of these groups are effectively dark money outlets when the bulk of their funding cannot be traced back to the original donor.
'Dark money groups have spent roughly $1 billion — mainly on television and online ads and mailers — to influence elections in the decade since the 2010 Citizens United v. FEC Supreme Court ruling that gave rise to politically active nonprofits."
The two main types of election spending:
Hard money: traditional political spending
Soft money: outside political spending (political spending made by organizations and individuals other than candidate campaigns themselves), explained, with examples.
Political nonprofits:
Types of 501(c) Organizations (explained):
501(c)(3) groups: These organizations operate for religious, charitable, scientific or educational purposes.
501(c)(4) groups: Often referred to as "social welfare" organizations, these nonprofits are the most common kind of dark money group.
Groups you may know: National Rifle Association, Planned Parenthood, Majority Forward, One Nation
501(c)(5) groups: These are labor and agricultural groups and may engage in political activities, as long as they adhere to the same general limits as 501(c)(4) organizations. Groups you may know: Service Employees International Union (SEIU), American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
501(c)(6) organizations: These are business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards and trade associations.
Groups you may know: US Chamber of Commerce, American Bankers Association, National Association of Realtors
Also explained: Super PACs, Hybrid PACs (Carey Committees), Limited Liability Companies (LLC) and Shell Companies,
• Dark Money (Wikipedia entry)
Dark money entered the politics of the United States with Buckley v. Valeo (1976), when the United States Supreme Court laid out "Eight Magic Words" that define the difference between electioneering and issue advocacy – exempting the latter from election finance laws.
The eight words and phrases:
"vote for"
"elect"
"support"
"cast your ballot for"
"Smith for Congress"
"vote against"
"defeat"
"reject"
or any variations thereof."
See Issue advocacy ads (Wikipedia)
• The difference between super PACs and dark money groups (Melissa Yeager, Sunlight Foundation, 10-30-2015)
"The only reason we know about how much they are spending is because, under FCC rules, broadcasters are required to keep information about who is buying ads on their stations and make them available to the public online.
This is one of the only ways to pick up on how dark money groups are getting involved in elections. However, there is no standardization of what information broadcasters are required to file making it often difficult to figure out who is behind the dark money groups."
• Democrats Decried Dark Money. Then They Won With It in 2020.
(Kenneth P. Vogel and Shane Goldmacher, NY Times, 1-29-22)
A New York Times analysis reveals how the left outdid the right at raising and spending millions from undisclosed donors to defeat Donald Trump and win power in Washington.
The findings reveal the growth and ascendancy of a shadow political infrastructure that is reshaping American politics, as megadonors to these nonprofits take advantage of loose disclosure laws to make multimillion-dollar outlays in total secrecy. Some good-government activists worry that the exploding role of undisclosed cash threatens to accelerate the erosion of trust in the country’s political system.
(Amanda Becker, The 19th, 1-4-24)
Tax filings shed light on the conservative activist's role in the network of groups challenging FDA regulation of mifepristone in a case set to go before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in June 2022 eliminated the federal right to abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. At that time, medication abortions accounted for more than half of all abortions provided by clinics annually in the United States.
Leonard Leo has played a well-known role shaping the current judiciary via the Federalist Society and advising former President Donald Trump on Supreme Court picks. Less examined is the vast web of entities linked to Leo that work to promote his conservative Christian worldview by weakening the Voting Rights Act, promoting publicly funded religious schools — and restricting access to medication abortion.