One reason why the case has attracted an unusual amount of attention is that the Supreme Court's recent rulings, including the Citizens United decision, have been generally pro-free speech. Unless the court wanted to nudge First Amendment law in a more restrictive direction, the thinking goes, there would be no reason for it to accept the case in the first place.

There is a distinct possibility that our conservative Supreme Court is about to stake out the position that the first amendment provides strong protections for the corrupt interests who buy our elections but does not protect the right of teenagers to play video games of their choice.

Mind you, its not as if liberals like Breyer are any better in this regard - I literally could not continue reading "Active Liberty" when I got to his weakly caveated argument that the right to freedom of speech only applies to political speech.