In Wisconsin, conservative and pro-business groups on Friday said they were considering a lawsuit to block a proposed law that would ban corporate spending during political campaigns. In Kentucky and Colorado, lawmakers looked for provisions in their state constitutions that may need to be rewritten. And in Texas, lawyers for Tom DeLay, the former House Republican majority leader, said the pending state campaign finance case against him should be thrown out. A day after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the federal government may not ban political spending by corporations or unions in candidate elections, officials across America were rushing to cope with the fallout, as laws in 24 states were directly or indirectly called into question by the ruling. The states that explicitly prohibit independent expenditures by unions and corporations will be most impacted by the ruling. However the decision has consequences for all states, since they are now effectively prohibited from adopting restrictions on corporate and union spending on political campaigns. For now, the decision does not overturn all the state laws in question, but it is only a matter of time, experts said, before the laws will be challenged in the courts or repealed by state legislatures. Since the state laws are vulnerable it is unlikely that officials will continue enforcing them, experts said. Montana is one of the states that will probably be affected. It has one of the nation's oldest campaign finance laws, approved by voters in 1912 after a copper baron, William A. Clark of Butte, bribed members of the state Legislature to get a U.S. Senate seat. Chris Gallus, a former lobbyist and a lawyer who represents business interests in Montana, said his clients would most likely challenge the statute if it was not stricken. States that can expect to see the biggest and most sudden influx of money are those -- like Ohio and Florida -- where it is relatively expensive to run campaigns and where races are competitive, said Ray La Raja, a political science professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. He predicted corporate spending would increase in states where control of state governments hangs in the balance. The decision could also affect pending trials, like that of DeLay, who was charged in 2005 with criminal violations of state campaign finance laws and money laundering. The decision may galvanize reformers to push harder for public financing of elections. 