In Public Funding Case, Conservative Justices Find An Array of Problems with Arizona's Law

Holtzman Vogel PLLC:

"Early news reports picked up on skepticism from the Court's more conservative justices, although their questioning was not limited to 'leveling the playing field' arguments, as an initial AP report suggested.

 A few examples:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Counsel, do you agree that under our precedents, leveling the playing field for candidates is not a legitimate State purpose?
MR. JAY: We do, Mr. Chief Justice. That -- that, of course, is not what's at work here.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, I checked the [Arizona] Citizens' Clean Elections Commission website this morning, and it says that this act was passed to, quote, 'level the playing field' when it comes to running for office. Why isn't that clear evidence that it's unconstitutional?

JUSTICE ALITO: But would you agree that the matching fund provision by itself does not serve an anticorruption purpose?