What looks like a technical dispute over “coordination limits” is really a struggle over whether politics remains a contest of persuasion or becomes a market of dominance. If parties and candidates can legally function as a single financial machine, the distance between public will and private wealth shrinks to almost nothing. Donors wouldn’t just boost campaigns; they could effectively script them, with every ad, every message, every strategy calibrated to protect their investment.
Supporters of the current rules aren’t naïve about money’s role in politics; they’re drawing a line before elections become fully staged productions. After Citizens United, super PACs and dark money already pushed democracy toward the edge. This case asks whether the Court will pull it back—or give its blessing to a system where the real election happens long before ballots are cast, in rooms only money can enter.
