( CNN ) -- The Supreme Court on Wednesday reinforced the nation 's belief in freedom and its constitutional traditions with a ruling that upheld my challenge to a section of the federal election campaign law that restricted citizens ' rights to express their views . That outcome , I believe , will become part of a successful attack on the numbing political status quo in Washington and encourage activists across the nation who have fresh ideas to improve how our government operates . I am grass-roots proof that citizens retain some influence and—with determination—can achieve positive change . I hardly suspected such an outcome in late 2011 when I launched my legal challenge . My target was the overall limits on an individual 's fully disclosed contributions to federal candidates , national political parties and political action committees . I did not challenge the specific contribution limits in each category . This case is not about limits on the amount of money you may contribute to an individual candidate . It is about your right to contribute that amount to as many candidates as you choose . Allowing individuals to donate to as many candidates as they wish would draw contributions away from PACs and bring money directly to candidates , giving underdog candidates a fair chance in the political arena . Like most Americans , I had little knowledge of these campaign laws—including how the Washington insiders passed them , interpreted them and enforced them . I have spent my adult life as an electrical engineer in the Birmingham , Alabama , area where I grew up and eventually created a small business that has fewer than two dozen employees . I was too busy for politics until five years ago , at age 42 , when I joined many other Americans who were disenchanted by what they saw in Washington and decided to take action . Sally Kohn : With ruling , money talks even louder in politics . The core belief that has driven my political activity and my legal challenge has been my full embrace of the First Amendment 's guarantee of free speech . During my political science course as a freshman at Georgia Tech University , I learned about the Supreme Court 's landmark 1976 decision that political activity was entitled to that protection . All the sitting justices joined , at least in part , that Buckley vs. Valeo ruling , which found that free and open debate—including unlimited campaign expenditures—is `` integral to the operation of the system of government established by our Constitution . '' This week 's ruling by Chief Justice John Roberts restated many of those vital national values . Excessive campaign finance restrictions , he wrote , impermissibly inject the government `` into the debate over who should govern . '' He pointedly added , `` And those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern . '' It does n't take a political scientist to conclude that congressional incumbents have been the chief beneficiaries of these restrictions . Even with the overwhelming public unhappiness with Congress , they typically have re-election rates of roughly 95 % . A key factor is that the current system makes it much more difficult for challengers to raise money . In most cases , they simply lack the incumbents ' access to tap into Washington 's deep-pocketed special interests . This status quo , which has been created chiefly by the so-called political reformers , has had the perverse—but seemingly intended—effect of protecting incumbents in both parties , except for infrequent waves of voter disgust . My objective is to assist challengers in raising funds , and to encourage smarter political ideas . I clearly am not one of those special interests , nor am I one of the billionaires who have become political targets . Friends call me `` your neighbor Shaun . '' With other activists , I believe that we can change our politics and draw it closer to our communities . Having become part of public life , I have learned that political conflict and rhetoric sometimes can be hard-ball . But I have made a point of fully respecting other players , even if they criticize me . My support of the First Amendment in this case helps extend those rights to everybody . With the Supreme Court 's encouragement , I hope the nation is prepared for a robust and wide-open public debate to address our problems .
Shaun McCutcheon sues to remove overall contribution limit for individuals . Court strikes down contribution limit , saying donations are form of free speech . McCutcheon : Limits had the effect of protecting incumbents , empowering special interests . He says he wants to make it easier for challengers to raise funds and create change .