ABSTRACT
In McCutcheon, a plurality of the Court prohibited Congress from remedying “soft” corruption in the political process (i.e., undue access to and influence over elected officials), and in so doing undermined the integrity of democratic decision making and compromised the core purpose of the First Amendment.1 In a 5-4 decision, the Court
held that the interest in preventing wealthy individuals from gaining unfair access to or influence over elected officials did not justify aggregate spending limits on individual contributions. As a result, the Court adopted an overly narrow definition of corruption and sanctioned a governance structure in which elected officials are accountable to a small percentage of wealthy donors, not ordinary citizens. Consequently, the plurality’s decision in McCutcheon contributed to political inequality by making it harder for ordinary citizens to meaningfully participate in democracy, and made it likely that the influence of money, not the strength of ideas, would continue to undermine the fairness and integrity of the electoral process.
