Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, No. 08-205, was argued on March 24, 2009. On June 29, the Supreme Court set the case for reargument on September 9 and ordered supplemental briefing on the following question:

For the proper disposition of this case, should the Court overrule either or both Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990), and the part of McConnell v. Federal Election Comm'n, 540 U.S. 93 (2003), which addresses the facial validity of Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, 2 U.S.C. § 441b?

Please find the original briefs and the briefs for the supplemental question below.

Merit briefs

• Brief for Appellant Citizens United
• Supplemental Brief for Appellant Citizens United
• Supplemental Reply Brief for Appellant Citizens United
• Brief for Appellee Federal Election Commission
• Supplemental Brief for Appellee Federal Election Commission
• Supplemental Reply Brief for Appellee Federal Election Commission
• Reply Brief for Appellant Citizens United

• Brief for the Foundation for Free Expression in Support of Appellant
• Brief for The Free Speech Defense and Education Fund, Inc., Free Speech Coalition, Inc., et al., In Support of Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the Pacific Legal Foundation in Support of Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the CATO Institute in Support of Appellant
• Supplemental Brief for the CATO Institute in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Committee for Truth in Politics in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Center for Competitive Politics in Support of Appellant
• Supplemental Brief for the Center for Competitive Politics in Support of Appellant
• Brief for Senator Mitch McConnell in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Alliance Defense Fund in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Alliance Defense Fund in Support of Appellant on the Supplemental Question
• Brief for the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Wyoming Liberty Group and the Goldwater Institute in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Wyoming Liberty Group and the Goldwater Institute Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation in Support of Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the United States Chamber of Commerce in Support of Appellant
• Supplemental Brief for the United States Chamber of Commerce in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Support of Appellant
• Supplemental Brief for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Institute for Justice in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Institute for Justice in Support of Appellant on the Supplemental Question
• Brief for Judicial Watch in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the American Justice Partnership and Let Freedom Ring in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Fidelis Center for Law and Policy and CatholicVote.com In Support of the Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the American Civil Liberties Union in Support of Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the National Rifle Association in Support of Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the American Civil Rights Union in Support of Appellant
• Supplemental Brief for the American Civil Rights Union in Support of Appellant (reprint)
• Brief for Campaign Finance Scholars in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the California Broadcasters Association, the Illinois Broadcasters Association, the Louisiana Association of Broadcasters, Maine Association of Broadcasters, the Michigan Association of Broadcasters, the Missouri Broadcasters Association, the Minnesota Broadcasters Association, the Nebraska Broadcasters Association, New York State Broadcasters Association, and the Tennessee Association of Broadcasters in Support of Appellant
• Brief for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce in Support of Appellant and Reversal of Austin V. Michigan Chamber of Commerce in Support of Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the California First Amendment Coalition in Support of Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the Seven Former Chairmen and One Former Commissioner of the Federal Election Commission Supporting Appellant on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the Center for Political Accountability and the Carol and Lawrence Zicklin Center for Business Ethics Research in Support of Appellee
• Brief for the Center for Political Accountability and the Carol and Lawrence Zicklin Center for Business Ethics Research at the Wharton School in Support of Appellee on Supplemental Question
• Brief for the Program on Corporations, Law & Democracy; Women’s International League for Peace & Democracy; Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County; Shays2: the Western Massachusetts Committee on Corporations & Democracy; and The Clements Foundation in Support of Appellee on Supplemental Question
• Brief for Senator John McCain, Senator Russell Feingold, Former Representative Christopher Shays, and Former Representative Martin Meehan in Support of Appellee
• Supplemental Brief for Senator John McCain, Senator Russell Feingold, Former Representative Christopher Shays, and Former Representative Martin Meehan in Support of Appellee
• Supplemental Brief of the Sunlight Foundation, the National Institute on Money In State Politics and The Center for Civic Responsibility in Support of Appellee
• Brief of the American Independent Business Alliance In Support Of Appellee on Supplemental Question
• Supplemental Brief of the Center for Independent Media, Calitics.com, Eyebeam, Zack Exley, Laura Mcgann, and the Brennan Center For Justice At NYU School of Law as Amici Curiae In Support of Appellee
• Brief of the Public Good in Support of Appellee on Supplemental Question
• Brief of Justice At Stake, American Judicature Society, The Center For Governmental Studies, Citizen Advocacy Center, Common Cause, Colorado Judicial Institute, Democracy North Carolina, The Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, Justice For All (Arizona), Michigan Campaign Finance Network, North Carolina Center for Voter Education, Ohio Citizen Action, Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, Public Campaign, Takeaction Minnesota, Texans for Public Justice, Transparency International USA, Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, Chicago Appleseed, Chicago Council of Lawyers, and Former Chief Justice Norman S. Fletcher (Georgia, Retired) in Support of Appellee
• Supplemental Brief of the Committee for Econoomic Development in Support of Appellee
• Brief of the Democratic National Committee in Support of Appellee
• Supplemental Brief of Representatives Chris Van Hollen, David Price, Michael Castle, and John Lewis in Support of Appellee
• Supplemental Brief of Campaign Legal Center, Democracy 21, Common Cause, U.S. PIRG, Americans for Campaign Reform, the League of United Latin American Citizens, and the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund in Support of Appellee on Supplemental Question
• Brief of Norman Ornstein, Thomas Mann, Anthony Corrado, and Daniel Ortiz in Support of Appellee (reprint)
• Brief of the League of Women Voters of the United States and the Constitutional Accountability Center in Support of Appellee
• Brief for the Hachette Book Group, Inc. and HarperCollins Publishers L.L.C. In Support of Neither Party on Supplemental Questions
• Supplemental Brief of Former Officials of the American Civil Liberties Union in Support of Neither Party
• Brief for the Independent Sector in Support of Neither Party
• Brief for the States of Montana, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, West Virginia, As Amici Curiae Addressing June 29, 2009 Order For Supplemental Briefing And Supporting Neither Party