By Fredreka Schouten
In the end, laws in as many as 18 states and the District of Columbia may be vulnerable to challenge – either because they limit how much an individual can contribute to all candidates or parties or impose other restrictions that run counter to the high court’s reasoning in McCutcheon, the Center for Competitive Politics argues in a new analysis. The group favors fewer campaign restrictions.
Writing for the majority in McCutcheon, Chief Justice John Roberts said free speech rights trump concerns about balancing who has a bigger voice in politics.
The government “may not regulate contributions simply to reduce the amount of money in politics or to restrict the political participation of some in order to enhance the relative influence of others,” he wrote.