Free Speech

Paragraph: 37 - Buckley acknowledged that aggregate limits at least diminish an individual's right of political association. As the Court explained, the N228* "overall $25,000 ceiling does impose an ultimate restriction upon the number of candidates and committees with which an individual may associate himself by means of financial support."

Notes:

• N228* / quote / endorsement / Q0362 /

Preferred Terms:

• (is) political association via money

Phrase match: individual's right of political association. As

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20140402.134.SCt.1434.xml&keyword1=right of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2018-03-15 12:38:56 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef Segmenter: ars9ef

Paragraph: 103 - The remaining justifications Buckley provided are also flawed. For example, Buckley claimed that contribution limits entail only a "marginal" speech restriction because N292* "[a] contribution serves as a general expression of support for the candidate and his views, but does not communicate the underlying basis for the support." 424 U.S., at 20, 21, 96 S. Ct. 612, 46 L. Ed. 2d 659. But this Court has never required a speaker to explain the reasons for his position in order to obtain full First Amendment protection. Instead, we have consistently held that speech is protected even N293* "when the underlying basis for a position is not given."

Notes:

• N292* / quote / endorsement / Q0552 /
• N293* / quote / endorsement / Q0551 /

Preferred Terms:

• (why is) Speech without Justification

Phrase match:

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20140402.134.SCt.1434.xml&keyword1= speech protected speech&wordsBefore=&wordsAfter=#m1

Search time: 2018-04-12 08:37:53 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk