Citizens United is an example of a case where the Supreme Court overruled a law created by democratically elected representatives in the name of democratic process. In this chapter the important First Amendment election finance case, Citizens United, is analyzed and critiqued through a survey of recent legal literature on the decision. In particular, the evaluations of Epstein, Dworkin and Robert C. Post are highlighted. Once a set of critiques are outlined, the issues of Citizens United are then analyzed under a democratic experimentalism framework. What is concluded is that the fact-based and experimental outlook of democratic experimentalism would help the Court avoid the dogmatic and authoritarian stance that the Citizens United opinion unfortunately exemplifies.
Keywords: First Amendment, Citizens United, Post, Epstein, Dworkin, democratic experimentalism, campaign finance