Did you catch Paul Clement’s discussion of Buckley during yesterday’s argument? His references to the case didn’t generate any specific questions. All of the audio is online here. In part, Clement argued: “This Court struck down the ban on expenditures, left the contribution ban in place, and for 4 decades Congress has tried to fix what’s left of the statute, largely unsuccessfully, whereas it would have I think worked much better from a democratic and separation of powers standpoint if the Court would have said: Look, expenditures are — you can’t limit expenditures under the Constitution; the contribution provision is joined at the hip. Give Congress a chance to actually fix the problem.”