Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-12_m6hn.pdf
Page Number: 27.0

22  FEDERAL ELECTION COMM’N v. TED CRUZ FOR SENATE 

Opinion of the Court 

harm the electoral process by preventing challengers from
mounting  effective  campaigns  against  incumbent  office-
holders”).  And  here  the  Government  has  not  shown  that 
Section 304 furthers a permissible anticorruption goal, ra-
ther than the impermissible objective of simply limiting the 
amount of money in politics. 

* 

* 

* 

For the reasons set forth, we conclude that Cruz and the 
Committee have standing to challenge the threatened en-
forcement of Section 304 of BCRA.  We also conclude that 
this provision burdens core political speech without proper
justification.  The  judgment  of  the  District  Court  is  af-
firmed. 

It is so ordered.