The Supreme Court struck down caps that individuals can make to candidates or political parties during a two-year election cycle, in an opinion issued Wednesday by Chief Justice John Roberts.

The case, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, marks the most consequential campaign finance ruling from the high court since the landmark Citizens United decision in 2010.

Critics immediately denounced the decision, saying it would give wealthy donors more freedom to influence an election.

In the majority opinion, the court ruled that the limits violated the First Amendment. The "aggregate limits do not further the permissible governmental interest in preventing quid pro quo corruption or its appearance," the opinion read (PDF).

Shaun McCutcheon, an Alabama businessman and the lead plaintiff in the case, challenged the limit on donations that individuals can give to candidates and political organizations, saying it limited his First Amendment rights. McCutcheon challenged section 441 of the Federal Election Campaign Act, which provides a biennial aggregate limit on the amount individuals can donate.

The decision split the court's conservative and liberal justices. Roberts was joined in the majority opinion by the court's other conservative-leaning justices: Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Antonin Scalia. Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's other conservative, concurred with the majority opinion but wrote a separate opinion arguing the court should have gone further.

The dissent came from the court's Democratic appointees: Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Stephen Breyer.

In 2014, the limit on all contributions was $123,200.

The Supreme Court's decision does not do away with limits on individual contributions to candidates for president or Congress, which now stands at $2,600 an election.

Republicans, in general, praised the court's decision.

"Today's Court decision in McCutcheon v. FEC is an important first step toward restoring the voice of candidates and party committees and a vindication for all those who support robust, transparent political discourse," Republican National Committee Chair Reince Priebus said in a statement.

McCutcheon had also been a pet case for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has been a longtime foe of restrictions on campaign contributions. McConnell filed an amicus brief in the case last May. And in a rare move, the court granted McConnell's lawyer time to argue before the court in the case.

"The court did recognize that it is the right of the individual, and not the prerogative of Congress, to determine how many candidates and parties to support," McConnell said in a statement.

"Let me be clear for all those who would criticize the decision: It does not permit one more dime to be given to an individual candidate or a party — it just respects the Constitutional rights of individuals to decide how many to support."

But Democrats and even some Republicans, like Republican Sen. John McCain, blasted the Supreme Court's decision. McCain, who has long been active in attempts at campaign-finance reforms, said he was disappointed by the decision.

"I am concerned that today's ruling may represent the latest step in an effort by a majority of the Court to dismantle entirely the longstanding structure of campaign finance law erected to limit the undue influence of special interests on American politics," McCain said. "I predict that as a result of recent Court decisions, there will be scandals involving corrupt public officials and unlimited, anonymous campaign contributions that will force the system to be reformed once again."