Supreme Court to debate GOP-led effort to lift campaign spending caps

By John Fritze, CNN

(CNN) — The Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday in a case initially filed by then-Senate candidate JD Vance that could lift the cap on how much political parties may spend in coordination with candidates, a case Democrats warn could increase the risk of corruption.

Republicans who are challenging the regulations will walk into the Supreme Court with the upper hand given that the court has repeatedly struck down other campaign finance rules.

Critics say the justices should dismiss the case, in part because Vance hasn’t offered any concrete plans to run for president in 2028.

Vance and the fundraising arms for House and Senate Republicans say the caps at issue are hopelessly inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s modern campaign finance doctrine and that they have led to greater polarization, in part because donors are more likely to turn to super PACs, which can raise unlimited funds.

In 2022, Vance and several party committees – including the National Republican Senate Committee – challenged the law as a violation of the First Amendment.

“A political party exists to get its candidates elected,” the National Republican Senatorial Committee and other groups told the Supreme Court. “It is therefore only natural that a party would want to consult with its candidate before expressing support for his election.”

The cap involves money spent by parties, such as on advertising, in coordination with a candidate. For 2024, the limits ranged from $123,600 to $3,772,100 for Senate candidates, and from $61,800 to $123,600 for House candidates, according to court records. The caps change based on the office sought, the voting-age population and inflation.

Super PACs, by contrast, may collect unlimited funds but they may not coordinate with the campaign they’re attempting to help, which means they sometimes may run advertising that is not directly on message with what the candidate may want.

Campaign finance experts and the Democratic groups that have intervened in the case argue that lifting the caps would effectively open a loophole around limits on how much donors may give to federal candidates.
Deep-pocketed donors could instead give tens of thousands of dollars each year to party committees with the understanding that the money be spent on a given candidate.

Democrats argue the Supreme Court already decided the question in a 2001 precedent.

“The potential for actual or apparent corruption is obvious,” the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic groups said. “And if this gambit becomes legal, parties will face extraordinary competitive pressure to assume an ever-growing share of candidates’ expenses.”

A divided 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the caps but made clear it might have ruled differently if it was “faced with a clear playing field.”

Jeffrey Sutton, chief judge for the 6th Circuit, wrote, that in “a hierarchical legal system, we must follow” the Supreme Court’s 2001 precedent unless the high court overrules it.

Trump DOJ not defending the caps

In an unusual move, the Justice Department, representing the Federal Election Commission, told the Supreme Court earlier this year it would not defend the caps. And so the court named a prominent Supreme Court attorney, Roman Martinez, to defend the 6th Circuit decision.

Calling the case a “jurisdictional mess” Martinez has argued the court should dismiss it on technical grounds. For one thing, Martinez has argued, Vance is no longer affected by the caps because it’s not clear at this point whether he is planning to run for federal office.

The case, though technical, has pit several high-profile Supreme Court lawyers against each other, including Noel Francisco, a former solicitor general.

Martinez, who clerked for both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh when he was a federal appeals court judge, regularly appears before the court. Sarah Harris, who briefly served as acting solicitor general earlier this year, will argue on behalf of the FEC. And Marc Elias, a prominent election attorney, will speak for the DNC and other Democratic organizations.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2025 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.