1ST AMDT - Free Speech - Colo. political contribution limits law unconstitutional under 14th Amdt Eq. Prot.

We do not suggest that the constitution would forbid any contribution limits based on an election cycle. But here the State of Colorado has created different contribution limits for candidates running against each other, and these differences have little to do with fighting corruption. Indeed, even now, the Defendants have failed to articulate how the statutory classification advances Colorado's interest in preventing corruption. Thus, we conclude that the statutory classification violates the right to equal protection for individuals wishing to contribute to write-ins, unaffiliated candidates, and minor-party candidates when each candidate runs unopposed for the nomination.

In these circumstances, the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the Defendants. Instead, summary judgment should have been awarded to the Plaintiffs. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with instructions to vacate the judgment and to award summary judgment to the Plaintiffs on their as-applied claim under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

Riddle v. Hickenlooper, No. 13-1108, 2014 WL 241983 (10th Cir. Jan. 23, 2014)

Volokh puts the question: 

May a state limit contributions to write-in and minor party candidates to $200, while in effect allowing $400 contributions to major party candidates?

[The answer is no, but is decided under equal protection a la Bush v. Gore, not First Amdt grounds.]