# Montana Voters Challenge Citizens United via New Ballot Initiative Initiative 194 seeks to redefine corporate powers to restrict political election spending. - **Source:** [Fortune | FORTUNE](https://brifing.si/source/769282ef-327a-4454-909a-3c7936216004) - **Published:** 2026-11-03 - **Topic:** [Business](https://brifing.si/c/business) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/f69acaf2-cb01-405e-96ad-655b00e5a4ee ## Challenging Supreme Court Precedent Montana voters are considering Initiative 194, a measure designed to restrict corporations and nonprofits from spending money on political elections. This initiative directly challenges the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling. Proponents argue that states possess the authority to define the specific powers granted to corporations through state-level corporate law frameworks. ## Redefining Corporate Legal Status The initiative classifies corporations as artificial persons, limiting their operational scope to powers deemed necessary and convenient. By removing political spending from this granted list, supporters claim they are redefining corporate capabilities rather than imposing a direct regulation. This legal strategy attempts to bypass constitutional protections previously established by federal court rulings. ## Scope and Specific Exemptions The measure applies to all entities conducting business or holding property within Montana. However, it explicitly exempts political action committees, news organizations, and individual donors from these new restrictions. If passed, organizations violating these rules risk losing state-granted privileges, most notably the limited liability protection that shields owners from personal business debts. ## Targeting Dark Money Channels Tom Moore, the legal architect behind the plan, suggests the initiative aims to eliminate dark money laundering. By preventing nonprofits from funneling contributions into political action committees, the state hopes to increase transparency. While wealthy individuals can still donate directly, the mechanism prevents them from hiding behind anonymous, non-disclosing organizational structures. ## Legal Opposition and Constitutional Concerns Critics, including former FEC chairman Bradley Smith, argue that the initiative is a semantic attempt to circumvent the First Amendment. They contend that states cannot force corporations to surrender constitutional rights in exchange for incorporation benefits. Opponents believe the Supreme Court will view this as an unconstitutional restriction on political speech. ## Historical Context of Montana Montana has a long history of attempting to curb corporate influence in local politics. In 1912, voters passed the Corrupt Practices Act with 76 percent support to counter mining industry power. That law was eventually struck down in 2012 by the Supreme Court, which ruled it conflicted with the Citizens United decision. ## National Legal Precedents Hawaii recently enacted Act 11, a law similar to Montana’s I-194, which is currently facing two federal lawsuits. These legal challenges, involving groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, will likely influence the national debate. The outcome of these cases may determine if corporate law can effectively restrict political spending nationwide. ## Future Implementation and Outlook If approved by voters, Initiative 194 is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027. However, legal experts anticipate that the measure will face immediate court challenges, likely reaching the Supreme Court again. The final resolution will define the extent to which states can regulate corporate political activity through local statutes. ## Sources covering this story - https://fortune.com/2026/11/03/montana-citizens-united-ballot-measure-midterms/ — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._