The editorial includes the following paragraph:

Last week the court agreed to hear a pair of campaign finance cases that invite it to rewrite settled law on the regulation of money in politics. In one, Vermont is trying to enforce campaign spending limits of the type the court struck down in the landmark case of Buckley v. Valeo , while plaintiffs are challenging the type of contribution limits that the court has repeatedly upheld. In the other, a group of Wisconsin antiabortion activists is seeking to carve a yawning loophole into the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, which the court only recently upheld. Either of these cases could be enormously destabilizing to election law, which is working pretty well and doesn’t need a judicial overhaul.

The last sentence made me chuckle.