Federal Election Commission v. Beaumont, 539 U.S. 146, 20 (2003)

Page:   Index   Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20

Cite as: 539 U. S. 146 (2003)

Thomas, J., dissenting

See also Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC, 528 U. S. 377, 427 (2000) (Thomas, J., dissenting). As in Colorado II, the Government does not argue here that 2 U. S. C. 441b survives review under that rigorous standard. Indeed, it could not. "[U]nder traditional strict scrutiny, broad prophylactic caps on . . . giving in the political process . . . are unconstitutional," Colorado I, 518 U. S., at 640-641, because, as I have explained before, they are not narrowly tailored to meet any relevant compelling state interest, id., at 641-644; Nixon, supra, at 427-430. See also Colorado II, supra, at 465-466. Accordingly, I would affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals and respectfully dissent from the Court's contrary disposition.

165

Page:   Index   Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20

Last modified: October 4, 2007