As feared, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled against Arizona’s Clean Elections Act, which provided a system in which publicly funded candidates could complete effectively with well-heeled opponents relying on private contributors.

The court, by a 5-4 majority, held that a provision for “matching funds” to publicly funded candidates when their opponents’ fundraising hit certain thresholds is unconstitutional because it inhibits free speech.

The move is going to force a number of states, including Hawaii, to amend public financing systems in which the success of privately-funded opponents triggers additional funding for candidates who have renounced private contributions.

The court’s opinion and additional background on the case are available online.