Thomas D. Carver v. Jeremiah W. Nixon, Attorney General, State of Missouri John Maupin, Chair, Missouri Ethics Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that previous contribution cap levels did not suggest possibility of corruption
• stating that there are \substantial reasons for according deference to legislative enactments that do not exist with respect to proposals adopted by initiative\
• reaching same conclusion to apply test articulated in Buckley, but without ana lytic distinction between freedom of association and freedom of speech
• “The fact that [the Missouri initiative] sets forth graduated limits has nothing to do with whether the limits are so low as to be unconstitutional.”
• process of legislative enactment includes deliberation, compromise and amendment, providing substantial reasons for deference that do not exist with respect to ballot measures
• state's compelling interest is in limiting large contributions, not all contributions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).