[jlogajan]

Before yesterday's ruling, coordinated activity between a candidate and citizens' group was only limited if it "expressly advocated the election or defeat" of a candidate, or met the 30/60 day ban definition. But now it will be limited year round if it meets the broader "promotes, supports, attacks or opposes" test discussed above.

Actually, no decision of any court can make legistation more restrictive, as the power to legistlate is left to the legislative branches.

[Rensselaer]

I wrote:

Before yesterday's ruling, coordinated activity between a candidate and citizens' group was only limited if it "expressly advocated the election or defeat" of a candidate, or met the 30/60 day ban definition. But now it will be limited year round if it meets the broader "promotes, supports, attacks or opposes" test discussed above.

To which logjam wrote:

Actually, no decision of any court can make legistation more restrictive, as the power to legistlate is left to the legislative branches.

To which I now respond:

Actually, it does make it more restrictive, because the Federal Elections Commission had based it regulations on the 30/60 day rule; but substituting for that the more sweeping "backup" definition that the Court upheld means it will apply year round.