Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC

Argued October 5, 1999
Decided January 24, 2000

Full case name:	Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General of Missouri, et. al, Petitioners v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC, et al.

Citations:	528 U.S. 377; 120 S. Ct. 897; 145 L. Ed. 2d 886; 2000 U.S. LEXIS 826; 68 U.S.L.W. 4102; 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Service 548; 2000 Daily Journal DAR 857; 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 462; 13 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 75

Holding

Court membership

Chief Justice: William Rehnquist
Associate Justices: John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer

Case opinions

Majority by: Souter
Joined by: Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Ginsburg, Breyer
Concurrence by: Stevens
Concurrence by: Breyer
Joined by: Ginsburg
Dissent by: Kennedy
Dissent by: Thomas
Joined by: Scalia

Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC, 528 U.S. 377 (2000),^[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that their earlier decision in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1 (1976) upholding federal limits on campaign contributions also applied to state limits on campaign contributions to state offices.

Justice John Paul Stevens' concurrence questioned more than two decades of campaign finance jurisprudence, stating: "Money is property; it is not speech."

Professor D. Bruce La Pierre argued in front of the Court for the respondents. Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon argued for the petitioners.