MONEY AND EQUALITY
Given the doctrinal weakness of the anticorruption rationale and the vigorous dissent it drew from Chief Justice Burger, one might think that that aspect of Buckley v. Valeo would have become the focal point of post-Buckley commentary. Instead, academic scholarship has been devoted primarily to criticizing the decision on other grounds. Although concern about corruption was the only compelling state interest accepted by the Supreme Court in Buckley to justify the First Amendment infringements of campaign regulation, it was not the only interest put forth by the defendants in that case. They also argued that political equality demanded, or at least permitted, government action that restricted the free speech of some through contribution and spending limits.