Millionaire Democrat Jack Davis of New York lost two races against Republican Rep. Tom Reynolds with the law in place. Mr. Davis sued, arguing that forcing disparate standards on candidates in the egalitarian pursuit of a "fair" campaign actually makes it more difficult for challengers to beat entrenched incumbents with established fund-raising networks. Restricting Mr. Davis' ability to collect comparable sums from donors and accept money from his own party plainly violated his First Amendment rights.

"We have never upheld the constitutionality of a law that imposes different contribution limits for candidates who are competing against each other," Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority.

The John Roberts court has taken bits and pieces out of the McCain-Feingold boondoggle over the past few years, giving us hope that justices might one day reconsider the 2003 ruling that upheld rigid federal regulation of political speech. Absent that possibility, the court's gradual gutting of this monstrosity is sufficient in signaling that a majority of this group of justices has appropriate respect for free speech rights.