Buying Promises: How Citizens United’s Campaign Expenditures Convert Our “Impartial” Judges and Their Nonpromissory Campaign Statements into an Indebted, Influenced, and Dependent Judiciary

Imagine this scenario: You play for the Atlanta Braves, who are in the final game of the World Series against the Yankees. The ballgame is tied in the top of the ninth with two outs, and when you step up to bat, you hit the ball into the stands right by the foul pole. However, it is unclear to you whether the ball flew behind or in front of the pole. The game, the championship, and possibly your career are riding on the home plate umpire’s call. He calls it a foul. The Yankees go on to win. Naturally, you would feel a great sense of disappointment but, nevertheless, know that the Yankees won it fair and square. Now, imagine that umpires were elected to their jobs and that during his “umpire campaign,” the home plate umpire made a campaign statement that he believed the American League was better than the National League. As a result of this statement, a particular corporation