The millionaire’s amendment works like this: in races with self-financing (read: wealthy) candidates, the amendment “levels the playing field” by requiring those candidates to disclose more information and permitting their opponents to raise more money. (Here’s a report from the WaPo, one from the WSJ, and a post from the Election Law Blog’s Rick Hasen, who predicts that the Court could uphold the provision increasing contribution limits for candidates who face self-financed opponents.)

But the Supremes seem to have a way of enlivening almost any topic, and they did so yesterday when they heard Davis v. Federal Election Commission, a battle over the constitutionality of the so-called “millionaire’s amendment,” part of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign-finance reform law.