Supreme Court case behind a cartoon

The cartoon is about corporate money in politics, so the related case has to be about campaign finance. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) held that the First Amendment protects independent political spending by corporations and unions, striking down limits on that spending. The cartoon carries a 2010 date, the year of the decision, and it reacts to the fear that corporate money would gain more sway over elected officials.

Each choice

• A. United States v. Lopez limited Congress's commerce clause power by striking down a federal ban on guns near schools. It has nothing to do with money in campaigns.
• B. McDonald v. Chicago applied the Second Amendment to the states. Matching it here may come from both cases dating from 2010.
• C. Shaw v. Reno held that a district drawn mainly by race can violate equal protection. It is about redistricting, not campaign funding.
• D (correct). Citizens United protected independent political spending by corporations as speech, which is the corporate influence the cartoon mocks.