The Supreme Court's controversial decision in January allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts from their own treasuries in federal elections has raised the stakes for supporters and opponents of campaign finance regulation. Critics of campaign finance laws are citing the so-called Citizens United decision in an array of court cases aimed at loosening the restrictions on fund-raising or spending by political committees and advocacy groups. Meanwhile, supporters of campaign finance regulation are hoping Congress or the states will pass legislation to limit the impact of the Supreme Court decision. Two leading congressional Democrats are sponsoring a bill to impose new requirements for corporations that spend money on congressional or presidential elections. Republicans, who stand to benefit from increased corporate spending in the year's midterm congressional elections, are opposing the proposal. Advocates and experts on both sides are also waiting for final rulings in two cases where lower courts struck down state public financing schemes.

Kenneth Jost is Supreme Court editor, CQ Press; associate editor, CQ Researcher; and author of The Supreme Court Yearbook since the 1992-1993 edition.