Taylor Lorenz’s Power User
Taylor Lorenz’s Power User

The Secret Plan to Kill Super PACs (How We Finally End Citizens United)

July 24, 2026

AI Summary

5 min read

In 2010, a little-known lower court ruling called SpeechNow.org v. FEC created super PACs by claiming that unlimited donations to these committees posed no risk of quid pro quo corruption. Fifteen years later, Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig is leading a legal campaign to overturn that decision—not by attacking the famous Citizens United case, but by using its own logic against it. If the First Circuit Court of Appeals rules in his favor, the case could reach the Supreme Court and potentially end super PACs by 2028.

The Real Origin of Super PACs

Most people blame Citizens United for the flood of billionaire money into U.S. elections. Lessig argues that's a mistake. The Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United held that corporations and unions could spend unlimited money independently on political speech. But it did not address contributions to political committees. Three months later, a three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit issued SpeechNow, extending Citizens United's reasoning to hold that donations to independent expenditure-only committees—super PACs—could not corrupt a candidate because the committees were supposedly independent from campaigns.

Continue reading the full summary in the app — free to try.

Read Full Summary →

Free • No credit card required

Listen to Audio Summary Open in App

What you'll learn

  • 1 (01:25) **The Real Origin of Super PACs** - Harvard Law professor Larry Lessig explains that Super PACs were created not by the infamous *Citizens United* Supreme Court decision, but by a lesser-known lower court case, *SpeechNow.org v. FEC*, decided three months later.
  • 2 (05:58) **Why Everyone Blames Citizens United** - Lessig explains the public confusion, noting *Citizens United* was so famous for recognizing corporate First Amendment rights that it overshadowed the *SpeechNow* decision that actually unleashed unlimited Super PAC donations.
  • 3 (08:53) **The Menendez Case Exposes the Flaw** - The indictment of Senator Robert Menendez for a quid pro quo involving a Super PAC donation provided the smoking gun that *SpeechNow*'s core premise was false.
  • 4 (11:10) **The Failed Paths and the Maine Breakthrough** - After failed attempts in Alaska and Massachusetts, Lessig's group, Equal Citizens, found success in Maine, where a 2024 ballot initiative passed with a record-setting 74.9% of the vote to end Super PACs in the state.
  • 5 (12:12) **The Legal Challenge and the District Court Ruling** - After the vote, two Super PACs sued, and Lessig recruited former Solicitor General Neal Katyal to defend the law.
  • 6 (14:09) **The Supreme Court "Gift"** - Lessig frames the case as a gift to the Supreme Court, allowing them to uphold *Citizens United* while finally ruling that states can regulate Super PACs when a clear risk of corruption is proven.
  • 7 (16:43) **Current Status: The First Circuit Appeal** - The case is now before the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, with oral arguments scheduled for July 29th.

+ Full timestamped outline available in the app

Show Notes

The Secret Court Case That Could Destroy Super PACs Forever

SUPPORT MY WORK: 

Buy a paid subscription to my newsletter at https://www.usermag.co   

Support my work on Patreon: http://patreon.com/taylorlorenz      

You've been told that Citizens United created Super PACs… but that's not the full story. In this episode of Free Speech Friday, Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Lessig reveals the obscure lower court ruling (SpeechNow v. FEC) that actually unleashed unlimited billionaire money into American elections, and the groundbreaking legal strategy that could end Super PACs by 2028 WITHOUT overturning Citizens United.

Backed by an unlikely coalition including Mark Cuban and Reid Hoffman, Lessig and his group Equal Citizens helped Maine voters pass a historic ballot initiative banning Super PAC contributions. Now the case is headed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals on July 29, with famed Supreme Court litigator Neal Katyal arguing that nothing in the Constitution protects billionaires' "right" to buy elections. If the appeal succeeds, this case could reach the Supreme Court by 2027 and revive existing federal limits on campaign contributions nationwide.

We break down: ▶ Why SpeechNow v. FEC — not Citizens United — created the Super PAC system ▶ How the Menendez bribery indictment exposed the "no quid pro quo" myth ▶ The originalist argument designed to win over conservative justices ▶ Billionaire outside spending's explosion from 0.3% to 19% of election money ▶ The AI Super PAC trying to block Congress from regulating artificial intelligence ▶ Why an Article V constitutional convention may be the backup plan ▶ What happens if the First Circuit rules on July 29, and the road to SCOTUS

If you care about money in politics, campaign finance reform, and getting billionaire money out of elections, this is the most important legal fight you've never heard of.


Taylor Lorenz’s Power User

More from this podcast

Taylor Lorenz’s Power User →