Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government Pac — Kennedy, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Kennedy's dissent concludes that the Court's decision to uphold Missouri's contribution limits perpetuates distortions of political speech created by Buckley v. Valeo. He argues Buckley forced speech underground via soft money, and thus the contribution limits fail any serious First Amendment review. Justice Kennedy states the Court should overrule Buckley and allow legislatures to experiment with new schemes. In separate writings, Justice Thomas contends contributions warrant strict scrutiny, and Justice Breyer agrees the Court should employ flexible balancing to protect electoral integrity. Justice Stevens writes separately to state that money is property rather than speech.