Bibliography

Primary Sources
Websites Citizens United. "Citizens United : Dedicated to Restoring Our Government to Citizen Control." Citizens United : Dedicated to Restoring Our Government to Citizen Control. Citizens United, n.d. Web. <http://citizensunited.org/>. This website was very helpful in understand who Citizens United thought they were. It also allowed me an understanding of what they do and how their website is established. Citizens United. "Hillary The Movie." Hillary The Movie. Citizens United, n.d. Web. <http://www.hillarythemovie.com/>. This website displayed the Hillary: The Movie and the purpose of it. It also showed trailers, and the reason why the movie was made. It decried Hillary Clinton and was also the basis of the court case. Move to Amend. "Move to Amend." We the People, Not We the Corporations. Move to Amend, n.d. Web. <https://movetoamend.org/>. This website is the official website of Move to Amend organization, which is an antiCitizens United group. This website displayed the group's purpose, movement, and why they want to rid the ruling of the case.

FSFP. "Reclaim Democracy for the People!" Free Speech for People. Free Speech for People Organization, n.d. Web. <http://freespeechforpeople.org/>. This website is the official FSFP website, and similar to the Move to Amend organization, they are against the Citizens United court case ruling along with other court cases as well.

Open Secrets. "OpenSecrets Blog." Opensecrets RSS. Open Secrets, n.d. Web. <http://www.opensecrets.org/>.This is a political based website which does research on different statistics. It reveals different aspects of politics including things that people are now aware about.

Pictures Reclaim Democracy. Corporate Logo Flag - US Flag. N.d. Photograph. Reclaim Democracy. Reclaim Democracy. Web. <http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-logo-flag-usflag/>.This photograph is a United States corporate logo flag which has companies as the stars instead. It epitomizes the Citizens United ruling. Citizens United. Citizens United Logo. N.d. Photograph. Citizens United. Citizens United. Web. <http://reclaimdemocracy.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/citizens-unitedlogo.jpg>.This is the official Citizens United logo represented on their website. Reclaim Democracy. Supreme Court Justices. N.d. Photograph. What Is Citizens United? | An Introduction. Reclaim Democracy. Web. <http://reclaimdemocracy.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/who-are-citizensunited-supreme-court.png>.This photo includes the justices who decided the Citizens United Supreme Court case. These justices made the 5-4 ruling. Move to Amend. Move to Amend Logo. N.d. Photograph. Move to Amend. Move to Amend Organization. Web. <http://www.thealliancefordemocracy.org/images/move-toamend.png>. Move to Amend organization's logo that they posted on their website FSFP. Free Speech for People Logo. N.d. Photograph. Free Speech for People. Free Speech for People Organization. Web.

<http://www.phibetaiota.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/free-speech-for-people02.jpg>. This is the Free Speech for People organization's logo that they posted on their respective website.

Legal Documents Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. 588 U.S. Supreme Court of the United States. 2010. This is the court case which established the ruling of usage of the First Amendment for corporations. It was 5-4 rule, in favor of Citizens United. US Const. Amend. I. Section 1. Print. The First Amendment was the primary concern of the Citizens United v. FEC court case. It allowed me to read and understand all aspects of the amendment, rather than the vague freedom of speech clause. US Const. Amend. XIV. Section 1. Print. The Fourteenth Amendment deals with the concept of Equal Protection. This comes into play because corporations were ruled as people.

Research Charts Open Secrets. "Corporate Spending." Chart. Opensecrets RSS. Open Secrets Organization, n.d. Web. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2014/01/Screen-Shot-2014-01-21at-2.37.39-PM.png>. Open Secret did a research to see how corporate spending has raised over the year, because of the ruling of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Open Secrets. "Total Liberal vs. Conservative Outside Spending, Excluding Party Committees." Chart. Opensecrets RSS. Open Secrets, n.d. Web. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2014/01/Screen-Shot-2014-01-21at-2.15.28-PM.png>. This is another research that Open Secrets did to estimate the amount of spending that political parties do. It is obvious that Conservatives have had more spending money after the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission rule.

Secondary Sources
Political Cartoons Zyglis, Adam. "Supreme Court's "First Amendment" Decision." Cartoon. Adam Zyglis, n.d. Web. <http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HyyDHyAwI6k/TMhbjTgvn9I/AAAAAAAAKuo/4Oz_cIDP npo/s1600/citizens+united+cartoon.png>.This political cartoon is a cartoon based on the court case of Citizens United v. FEC. Furthermore, it exaggerates the the beginning of the Constitution now begins as, "We the Corporations".

Wuerker, Matt. "Citizens United - Equal Protection." Cartoon. Matt Wuerker, n.d. Web. <http://radiofreethinker.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/matt-wuerker-corporate-courtprotection.jpg>.This political cartoon displays a Supreme Court justice shielding the United States Corporations through an umbrella which says Equal Protection. It was drawn to epitomize the Citizens United case.

Wuerker, Matt. "Corpenstein." Cartoon. Matt Wuerker, n.d. Web. <http://movetoamend.org/sites/default/files/corpenstein-full-bitmap.gif>.This political

cartoon represents Citizens United through Corporate Personhood. It also emodies justices creating this ultimate "Frankenstein" like figure.

Wuerker, Matt. "Wuerker Armour." Cartoon. Matt Wuerker, n.d. Web. <http://vermont4evolution.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/wuerkerarmour.jpg>. This political cartoon displays a knight that represents United States corporations, with all these different financial terms and political terms.

Story of Stuff. "Shoe-shining Corporations." Cartoon. Story of Stuff Organization, n.d. Web. <http://scjusticewatch.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/government.png>. This political cartoon represents a large corporation with a money symbol being shoe-shined by just a simple individual.

Websites Story of Citizens United v. FEC. Dir. Story of Stuff. Story of Citizens United v FEC. Story of Stuff Organization, n.d. Web. <http://storyofstuff.org/movies/story-of-citizens-united-v-fec/>. This video helped me get a brief understanding of the legal issues involved in Citizens United v. FEC.

Scot US Blog. "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission." SCOTUSblog RSS. Scot US Blog, n.d. Web. <http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/citizens-united-v-federal-electioncommission/>. This website gave me different sources to read and analyze while doing my research. It game be different arguments and points to do my research.

Oyez. "CITIZENS UNITED v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION." Citizens United v.

Federal Election Commission. Oyez, n.d. Web. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2008/2008_08_205>. This website allowed me to grasp the opinions of each respective justices. It also asked questions which allowed me to do more research. Dunbar, John. "Center for Public Integrity." Center for Public Integrity. Public Integrity, 18 Oct. 2012. Web. <http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/10/18/11527/citizens-united-decision-and-why-itmatters>. This blog allowed me to read the opinions of an everyday blogger. This person not only expressed his opinions, but it also gave me reasons why this topic was heavily involved in Rights and Responsibilities. Pelosi, Nancy, and John Sarbanes. "Reversing the Grievous Error of Citizens United."Washington Post. The Washington Post, 04 Feb. 2013. Web. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/nancy-pelosi-and-john-sarbanes-reversingthe-grievous-error-of-citizens-united/2014/02/04/0f197d0a-8dba-11e3-98abfe5228217bd1_story.html>. This is an opinionated piece written by former House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. It is evident that this piece was written because she is liberal, whereas the Citizens United rule was better for conservatives. Ultimately she speaks about how we can reverse this ruling. Lease, James M., and Rob Hager. "The Problem With Citizens United Is Not Corporate Personhood." Truthout. Truthout, 17 Jan. 2012. Web. <http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/6095%3Athe-problem-with-citizens-united-is-notcorporate-personhood>. This website brought forth a different interpretation with the problems of Citizens United. It spoke about how Corporate Personhood was not the basis

of the problem. Schiff, Rep. Adam. "The Supreme Court Still Thinks Corporations Are People." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 18 July 2012. Web. <http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/the-supreme-court-still-thinkscorporations-are-people/259995/>. This website speaks about the flaws in the Citizens United ruling, and the possible opportunities the court had to fix it. However, it was not fixed, and is still valid today. Reclaim Democracy. "Reclaim Democracy!" Reclaim Democracy. Reclaim Democracy, n.d. Web. <http://reclaimdemocracy.org/>. This website established a foundation on what I need to understand, in order to look at the full spectrum of the issue. Essentially, it laid a foundation for my National History Day project- dating back to the 19th century. Wu, Tim. "The Right to Evade Regulation." New Republic. New Republic, Jan. 2012. Web. <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113294/how-corporations-hijacked-firstamendment-evade-regulation>. This website gives one a brief synopsis of how corporations slowly dominated the First Amendment. It is a verbal timeline of how the court began shaping the Amendment so that it would be in favor of companies. Multinational Monitor Magazine. "Corporations and Free Speech." Corporations and Free Speech. Third World Traveler, 1998. Web. <http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/Corps_FreeSpeech.html>. This website is a magazine article which deals with the controversy of corporate personhood. It was ten years before the actual court case, however, it gives good points and reasons why corporations cannot be more powerful than citizens.

Clark, Josh. "Why Do Corporations Have the Same Rights as You?" HowStuffWorks. How Stuff Works, 2012. Web. <http://money.howstuffworks.com/corporation-person.htm>. This website explains different political terms that deal with the court case of Citizens United v. FEC. It also speaks of the 14th Amendment. Reclaim Democracy. Timeline of Personhood Rights and Powers. Rep. Reclaim Democracy, n.d. Web. <http://reclaimdemocracy.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/07/personhood_timeline.pdf>.This timeline represents how personhood rights grew over the last two centuries. Essentially, it compares people to corporations. "Corporate Personhood Debate." Princeton University. Princeton University, n.d. Web. <http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Corporate_personhood_debate .html>.This website gave me different documents and terms to utilize and build from. It explained to me vital terms which dealt with Citizens United.