SCOTUS to hear GOP challenge to campaign spending limit

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take up the case originally filed by then-Senator J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, and former congressman Steve Chabot, R-Ohio. The lawmakers, along with the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee, filed the lawsuit in November 2022 challenging limits on the money political parties can spend in coordination with the campaigns of federal candidates. The current limit for spending on a Senate nominee ranges from $127,200 to $3,946,100 depending on the state’s voting age population. Parties can spend up to $127,200 on House nominees in states with only one representative, and up to $63,600 in states with two candidates. The plaintiffs argued the restrictions violate the First Amendment and said political parties exist to get their candidates elected. The Supreme Court will hear the case either later this fall or early 2026.

What has happened so far in the case? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in 2024 rejected the lawsuit, saying the limits aligned with prior rulings. But the court also admitted that the limits could conflict with recent First Amendment interpretation. The Trump administration’s election commission in May filed a brief agreeing with the plaintiffs, while the Democratic National Convention filed a motion to intervene in the case and defend the campaign finance restrictions.

What is the legal precedent for campaign finance cases? In the ruling last year, U.S. Court of Appeals Chief Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton cited the 2001 Supreme Court case Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee. At the time, the court ruled that limits were constitutional and prevented wealthy donors from circumventing individual donor restrictions by giving funding to the party rather than the candidate. In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. FEC that unions and corporations were not limited in how much money they spent to get a candidate elected as long as the money did not go directly to the candidate, a campaign, or a party.

Dig deeper: Read Carolina Lumetta's report about Trump’s investigation into online campaign fundraising.