McConnell v. Federal Election Comm'n, 540 U.S. 93, 85 (2003)

Page:   Index   Previous  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  Next

184

McCONNELL v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMM'N

Opinion of the Court

tions to or at the behest of federal candidates and officeholders, § 323(e) is clearly constitutional. We accordingly uphold § 323(e) against plaintiffs' First Amendment challenge.

New FECA § 323(f)'s Restrictions on State Candidates and Officeholders

The final provision of Title I is new FECA § 323(f). 2 U. S. C. § 441i(f) (Supp. II). Section 323(f) generally prohibits candidates for state or local office, or state or local officeholders, from spending soft money to fund "public communications" as defined in § 301(20)(A)(iii)—i. e., a communication that "refers to a clearly identified candidate for Federal office . . . and that promotes or supports a candidate for that office, or attacks or opposes a candidate for that office." 2 U. S. C. § 441i(f)(1); § 431(20)(A)(iii). Exempted from this restriction are communications made in connection with an election for state or local office which refer only to the state or local candidate or officeholder making the expenditure or to any other candidate for the same state or local office. § 441i(f)(2).

Section 323(f) places no cap on the amount of money that state or local candidates can spend on any activity. Rather, like §§ 323(a) and 323(b), it limits only the source and amount of contributions that state and local candidates can draw on to fund expenditures that directly impact federal elections. And, by regulating only contributions used to fund "public communications," § 323(f) focuses narrowly on those soft-money donations with the greatest potential to corrupt or give rise to the appearance of corruption of federal candidates and officeholders.

Plaintiffs advance two principal arguments against § 323(f). We have already rejected the first argument, that the definition of "public communications" in new FECA § 301(20)(A)(iii) is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. See n. 64, supra. We add only that, plaintiffs' and Justice Kennedy's contrary reading notwithstanding, post, at 316-

Page:   Index   Previous  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007