2712, 69 L.Ed.2d 567 (1981) (Blackmun, J., concurring) (“contributions to [PACs] may be limited ... as a means of preventing evasion of the limitations on contributions to a candidate”). 1. The Challenged Limits Considered in Isolation Plaintiffs take pains to make clear that they are not arguing that the contribution limits on individuals and PACs, standing alone, are too low. Doc. 42 at 4-5. That said, and to place Plaintiffs’ actual arguments in context, 5-97, 120 S.Ct. 897, 145 L.Ed.2d 886 (2000) (upholding a $1,075 limit on individual and PAC contributions to candidates for statewide office in Missouri); Buckley, 424 U.S. at 23-29, 96 S.Ct. 612 (upholding a $1,000 limit on individual and PAC contributions to candidates for federal office); see also Thalheimer, 645 F.3d at 1124 (<HOLDING>). The same holds for the Act’s $10,000 limit on
holding that  1367 does not overrule zahn holding that the right to associate with others as a military company is not a privilege of citizens of the united states holding that citizens united did not implicitly overrule beaumont holding that the fourteenth amendment which makes persons bom in the united states and subject to its jurisdiction citizens of the united states and requires that representatives be apportioned among the states based on population excluding indians not taxed did not make an indian a citizen of the united states holding constitutional a tax on a private citizens interest in housing on government property received as part of the private citizens compensation