While that may not have been the best ruling to come out of the Supreme Court, I fail to see how it's "Wall Street's fault". The nine justices on the Supreme Court are, as we all know, appointed for life, and they have no pecuniary interest in coming to their decision.

If you read the ruling, you will see that the concern was that the law was overly broad. The ruling was actually hailed by the ACLU as a good one, it should be noted, and I think that a more narrow law on campaign finance reform could pass. However, that's not something to protest on Wall Street. At this point you either try to get Congress to write something similar and get the Court to distinguish its treatment of that law from the earlier ruling or you get a Constitutional amendment.