SCOTUS rules limits on campaign spending are unconstitutional

In a 6-3 decision on Tuesday, the Supreme Court struck down a federal law that set limits on how much money political parties could spend in coordination with a political office candidate. The court ruled that the coordinated expenditure limits set by the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) violate the First Amendment, and overruled a 2001 decision from the court that upheld the limits.

The case was first launched in 2022, with the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee, then-candidate for Senate JD Vance, and then-Representative Steve Chabot suing the Federal Election Commission and its commissioners. They claimed that "the political-party coordinated-expenditure limits violate the First Amendment. Plaintiffs argued that political parties possess a First Amendment right to spend money as they see fit on political advertising and other campaign activities—and to do so in coordination with the parties’ candidates." 

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the majority, "In tension with the text of the First Amendment, FECA limits political-party coordinated expenditures and thus restricts political parties’ speech in support of their own candidates during political campaigns," saying that the restriction is a severe First Amendment problem.

He wrote that modern congressional limits on coordinated expenditures between political parties "restrict that coordination and the party’s speech. The limits impair the party’s traditional forms of communication such as advertisements; preclude parties from amplifying the voice of their adherents; impose additional monetary costs and burdens on political parties; and inflict a 'stifling effect on the ability of the party to do what it exists to do.’"

Under FECA, the national committee of a political party can spend between $130,600 to $4,071,800 in coordination with an individual Senate candidate, and from $65,300 to $130,600 in coordination with an individual House candidate. In the 2024 presidential election, the national committee of a political party could spend $32,392,200 in coordination with a Presidential candidate. 

Kavanaugh wrote that the political-party coordinated-expenditure limitations under FECA "directly abridge the freedom of speech of political parties" in violation of the First Amendment, and that "constitutional text, history, and precedent" back up the ruling. 

He stressed that the ruling "treats all political parties equally," and will "allow all political parties—including the DNC and RNC and the respective Senate and House campaign committees, as well as other parties and party committees—to participate more freely and compete more fully in the political process, and to coordinate more closely with their candidates."

"Whether the Democratic party, the Republican party, or other parties, all political parties and candidates going forward can compete equally under the same rules regarding coordinated expenditures and can structure their fundraising, spending, and political speech on a level playing field as they see fit within the law."

Supreme Court FEC Ruling by Hannah Nightingale