But the freedom of speech isn't absolute.  It never has been and never will be.  There are certain limits to it, and it's up to Congress to establish those limits.  (It's also up to the SCOTUS to make sure Congress doesn't go too far).<p>In the decision, the question wasn't "does this prohibit the freedom of speech", it was "does a corporation have the freedom of speech" in the first place.<p>The argument could be reframed (based upon my limited reading of the decision) as "Does a person have the freedom to hear the speech of a corporation?".  In this case, yes, they do.  But they don't have to listen to it.  And this is where I think there is still some play with McCain-Feingold in that perhaps it could be reworked to include a ban on corporations to use broadcast media w/in 30 days of an election.  They could put up a website, print pamphlets, etc... but just not use a passive medium for their message.