I'm curious if you think seven years later if it was a good decision for the USA.  IMO, money corrupts and indeed, we have seen plenty of that post CU.

The first amendment protects ". . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble", but makes no mention of protecting an assembly's "free speech", only individual people's.  It certainly doesn't classify spending money as "free speech" or such assemblies as "people" deserving that right.

Most importantly however, the stockholders / private owners and the members / employees of these corps and labor unions already have the right to free speech and to contribute politically to a campaign.  So in effect, CU simply grants the exceptional rights in addition to the rights the owners already have.  Do you think the employees of Koch industries have any input into the corp's so called "free speech"?