Supreme Court Strikes Down Campaign Law

 By Kathleen Ronayne

SUPREME COURT DEEMS ARIZONA CAMPAIGN LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL: The Supreme Court on Monday voted down a portion of Arizona's campaign finance system that made more public financing available to candidates when their privately funded opponents outspent them. 

The court voted on the case, McComish v. Bennett, 5-4. 

The intended purpose of the law was to allow candidates with modest fund-raising abilities from being out-spent by opponents. Any candidate who accepted public financing would receive more funding, called "trigger funds," in one of two cases: if the candidate's opponent denied public financing and raised private upwards of a certain amount, or, if outside groups spent upward of a certain amount of money on attack ads against the candidate.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, stating the law limited free speech of outside groups and candidates who accepted private funding, because it matched that funding with government money. 

In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan argued the law increased more free speech, because it allowed everyone - no matter their ability to fund-raise competitively on their own -- to run for political office.