Final answer:
Justice Kennedy believed that the increased money in politics post-Citizens United is not concerning because the Supreme Court sees corporate and union campaign contributions as protected free speech under the First Amendment.
Step-by-step explanation:
Justice Kennedy, in the decision of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, suggested that increased money in politics should not be a concern primarily because the Supreme Court views political campaign contributions by corporations and unions as a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment. He believed that just as individuals are entitled to free speech, so too are entities like corporations, and that includes the ability to spend money on political campaigns and issues.
The ruling in Citizens United overturned the 'soft money' ban of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, enabling corporations and unions to spend unlimited funds on elections. The First Amendment rights were deemed more important than the potential corruption risks posed by unlimited funding. As such, this controversial 5-4 decision has allowed more money to flow into the political sphere without restriction, an action justified by the Court as a measure to protect the fundamental democratic right to free expression.