Which 2003 Supreme Court case upheld provisions regulating 'soft money' in campaign finance?

The 2003 Supreme Court case that upheld provisions regulating 'soft money' in campaign finance is McConnell v. FEC. This case was significant because it dealt with the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), which aimed to limit the influence of money in politics, specifically concerning soft money contributions to political parties.

The Court's decision supported the BCRA's restrictions on the raising and spending of soft money, which are funds used by political parties for purposes other than directly supporting candidates, as this could circumvent limitations placed on hard money donations (those directly given to candidates). The ruling reinforced the government's interest in preventing corruption and the appearance of corruption that could arise from unrestricted financial contributions, thus solidifying the framework for regulating campaign finance at a critical time when concerns about the impact of money on politics were prominent. This case set a precedent for subsequent discussions and legal challenges surrounding campaign finance reform.