context: Recognizing that the Buckley framework might control here, the Unions contend that the most stringent level of review under that framework -- one equal to strict scrutiny -- must apply because the VCA "limits the quantity of political speech." Although the Unions are correct that we apply a standard akin to strict scrutiny when reviewing limits on political expenditures, that is not the case with respect to political contributions.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.identifier: 366 F.3d 906, 906
citation_a.parenthetical: "Although a less stringent standard of review applies to limits on political contributions, we conclude that the standard for expenditure limits operates identically to strict scrutiny review."
citation_a.sentence: Ho- mans, 366 F.3d at 906 (“Although a less stringent standard of review applies to limits on political contributions, we conclude that the standard for expenditure limits operates identically to strict scrutiny review.”); see also McConnell, 540 U.S. at 134, 124 S.Ct. 619; Colo. Republican Fed. Campaign Comm., 533 U.S. at 440 (“Restraints on expenditures generally curb more expressive and associational activity than limits on contributions do.”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 533 U.S. 440, 440
citation_b.parenthetical: "Restraints on expenditures generally curb more expressive and associational activity than limits on contributions do."
citation_b.sentence: Ho- mans, 366 F.3d at 906 (“Although a less stringent standard of review applies to limits on political contributions, we conclude that the standard for expenditure limits operates identically to strict scrutiny review.”); see also McConnell, 540 U.S. at 134, 124 S.Ct. 619; Colo. Republican Fed. Campaign Comm., 533 U.S. at 440 (“Restraints on expenditures generally curb more expressive and associational activity than limits on contributions do.”).