Minnesota HF2688: A resolution memorializing Congress to overturn the United States Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. FEC, requesting that Congress clarify that the rights protected under the Constitution are the rights of natural persons and not the rights of artificial entities and that spending money to influence elections is not speech under the First Amendment, and asking that Congress propose a constitutional amendment to provide such clarification.

What the bill says

A resolution memorializing Congress to overturn the United States Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. FEC; requesting that Congress clarify that the rights protected under the Constitution are the rights of natural persons and not the rights of artificial entities and that spending money to influence elections is not speech under the First Amendment; asking that Congress propose a constitutional amendment to provide such clarification.

From the introduced text, March 24, 2025:

A resolution memorializing Congress to overturn the United States Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. FEC; requesting that Congress clarify that the rights protected under the Constitution are the rights of natural persons and not the rights of artificial entities and that spending money to influence elections is not speech under the First Amendment; asking that Congress propose a constitutional amendment to provide such clarification. WHEREAS, when the states and federal government first authorized the creation of corporations, they were regulated by the people and their elected representatives through law; and WHEREAS, the Supreme Court granted constitutional rights to corporations thereby limiting the right of the people to regulate corporations through federal, state, or local law; and WHEREAS, Supreme Court rulings on political spending in recent decades have undermined the First Amendment, which was designed, even according to the Supreme Court in 1976, "to secure the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources," and "to assure the unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people." Supreme Court rulings that have equated money as speech have enabled people, corporations, and other entities to spend virtually unlimited money in support of favored candidates and interests, undermining the core First Amendment value of open and robust debate in the political process …