Question

citizens united v federal election commission (2010) was a supreme court decision that...
allowed for parties to spend unlimited soft - money contributions in direct support of candidates, creating so - called super - pacs
gutted the voting right act provisions on federal review of local election laws and practices.
granted corporations the right to spend unlimited amounts on campaign ads of money as constitutionally protected free speech, creating so - called super - pacs.
reduced economic elite influence on candidates and campaigns.

Explanation:

Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010) was a landmark Supreme Court case. The Court ruled that corporations, unions, and other groups could spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns as a form of free speech. This led to the creation of Super - PACs (Political Action Committees).

• Option 1: Soft - money contributions were not the main focus. The ruling was about independent expenditures (not direct support in the way described).
• Option 2: This case was not about the Voting Rights Act.
• Option 3: The Court held that corporate spending on political campaigns (campaign ads) is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, which led to Super - PACs.
• Option 4: The ruling actually increased the influence of economic elites (as corporations, which are often associated with economic elites, could spend more).

Answer:

granted corporations the right to spend unlimited amounts on campaign ads of money as Constitutionally protected free speech, creating so - called Super - PACs.