National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Comm’n · ¶121

Consider first the varied forms a coordinated expenditure may take. The majority offers one example, which is least harmful to its cause but not the standard fare. A party, it says, might wish to “spend money to produce and place a television advertisement in support of a candidate after consulting with the candidate’s campaign about the content, timing, or placement of the advertisement.” Ante, at 7. So it might—and in such a case the ad seems not terribly far removed from a party’s independent speech on behalf of a candidate, which of course cannot be limited. See ante, at 6–7. That is why the majority uses the example as its lead case. More typical, though, is what happened here: The candidate’s campaign, on its own, produced a political advertisement, and sent the party the invoice after the fact. The party responded, “Received. Will process”—making clear that it is less a…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.