Citizen’s United’s documentary would air within this 30 day period before the primary election. Citizens United’s first argument that Hillary was not an “electioneering communication” because it was not “publicly distributed” was overruled by the precedent put down in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life Inc. that said the communication can only not be classified as such if it is beyond “reasonable interpretation”. Citizens United argued that it should be allowed to air the video via on-demand because there was a “lower risk of distorting the political process” through this delivery method than advertisements. Even with this, their argument was overshadowed by the fact that they aired a television advertisement that directly criticized Hillary Clinton while advertising the movie, and the court ruled that the ad was not beyond reasonable interpretation. Citizens United’s only other argument left was the right of free speech. They argued that their First Amendment right to free speech should be protected under the