Free Speech

Paragraph: 44 - In practice, Buckley scrutiny has meant that restrictions on contributions by individuals and political committees do not violate the First Amendment so long as they are N103* "closely drawn" to match a N104* "sufficiently important" government interest, Shrink Missouri, supra, at 387-389; see also Buckley, supra, at 58, but that restrictions on independent expenditures are constitutionally invalid, see Buckley, supra, at 58-59; see also Federal Election Comm'n v. National Conservative Political Action Comm., 470 U.S. 480, 501 (1985). The rationale for this distinction between contributions and independent expenditures has been that, whereas ceilings on contributions by individuals and political committees N105* "entai[l] only a marginal restriction" on First Amendment interests, Buckley, 424 U.S., at 20, limitations on independent expenditures N106* "impose significantly more severe restrictions on protected freedoms of political expression and association."

Notes:

• N103* / quote / endorsement / Q0580 /
• N104* / quote / endorsement / Q0151 /
• N105* / quote / endorsement / Q0144 /
• N106* / quote / endorsement / Q0491 /

Preferred Terms:

• (is) expenditures on political campaigns
• (reg) restrictions on campaign contributions

Phrase match:

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20010625.533.US.431.xml&keyword1= expression protected expression&wordsBefore=&wordsAfter=#m1

Search time: 2018-04-26 09:34:45 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk