Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-12_m6hn.pdf
Page Number: 31.0

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

KAGAN, J., dissenting 

than  it  otherwise  would.    Id.,  at  22.  But  the  Court  has 
viewed such limits as troublesome only if they are so low as
to prevent candidates from raising “the resources necessary
for effective advocacy.”  Randall v.  Sorrell, 548 U. S. 230, 
247 (2006) (plurality opinion) (quoting Buckley, 424 U. S., 
at 21).  In the usual case, the incidental effect of a contribu-
tion restriction on a campaign’s speech does not count as a
significant  First  Amendment  burden.    See  Randall,  548 
U. S., at 246–247. 

Under  that  precedent,  Section  304  “entails  only  a  mar-
ginal restriction” on speech, because it regulates contribu-
tions alone.  Buckley, 424 U. S., at 20.  The provision leaves
a campaign free to spend any amount of money for speech.
Likewise,  it  leaves  the  candidate  himself—here,  Senator 
Ted Cruz—free to do so.  The candidate can (in the major-
ity’s  words)  “use  personal  funds  to  finance  campaign
speech” without limit; if he wishes, he can devote his whole
fortune to “speech on behalf of his own candidacy.”  Ante, at 
10–11.  Section 304 restricts only the use of third-party con-
tributions to support his efforts—which, as just shown, im-
poses a far more modest First Amendment burden.  Recall 
how Section 304 works: It prevents post-election campaign
contributions from going to repay large loans that the can-
didate has made to his campaign.  So the provision limits—
much  as  standard  contribution  caps  do—only  the  candi-
date’s ability to shift the costs of his electoral speech to oth-
ers.  Or said a bit differently, it addresses not a candidate’s 
“self-fund[ing],” ante, at 12, but only his reliance on third-
party financing. 

And even that regulation of third-party contributions is a 
narrow one.  Under Section 304, a campaign can always ac-
cept donations for small loans a candidate makes.  And it 
can  use  pre-election  donations  to  retire  even  his  sizable 
loans.  The statute just insists that donations for that pur-
pose  occur  when  speech  is  ongoing,  and  before  everyone