You have been placed in the position of supporting the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.  Please develop your position into a one-page position paper (12-point font, single spaced).

The Citizens United case is ultimately one pertaining to freedom of speech—while undeniable to US citizens, the protection of free speech was previously denied to unions and corporations. Now, they can express support or criticism of political candidates. This should be good news for both dominant political parties, as liberals tending to support unions and conservatives tending to laud free enterprise both have great voice in the election process. Concern, however, has been raised that companies now have too loud a voice.
But, who makes up companies? Individual humans, who are free to join and leave those companies at will. Why would a group of humans be devoid of any rights to which the individuals of the group are entitled? The constitutional right to free speech, it follows, applies to groups of individuals – which companies are – and those groups should be able to leverage their earned dollars to further promote their own well-being. And the ruling has legal precedent: dating back to 1868, US corporations have enjoyed equal protection under the 14th amendment and protection against search and seizure without warrant (Totenberg, N.)
But the decision cannot be analyzed solely through legal theory. What have the actual impacts been since the ruling? Rather than observing unlimited spending from corporations as feared, the last ten years have reemphasized the importance of low-level donors; instead of focusing power on just one party or candidate that certain corporations back, political parties have taken turns assuming power; corporate donations remain under 10% of total political spending at the federal level. Furthermore, it seems that wealthy individuals, rather than any specific union or corporation, have been making oversized donations that dominant the budgets of super-PACs. It follows that any concerns around voices dominating the political conversation are indeed individuals, not unions or corporations as fear.
Citizens United allows companies to further act in their best interests and raise issues pertaining to the business. US citizens can and should be trusted to consume rhetoric intellectually, instead of shielded from the arguments companies are making.