Supreme Court hears GOP bid to end party spending caps
The Supreme Court heard a GOP‑backed challenge to federal limits on coordinated party expenditures brought by then‑Senate candidate JD Vance, then‑Rep. Steve Chabot and the NRSC/NRCC, which in the 2023–24 cycle cap coordinated party spending at roughly $61,800–$123,000 for House races and $123,600–$3.7 million for Senate races. Justices Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh signaled support for striking the limits, with Kavanaugh saying finance rules have weakened parties relative to outside groups, Chief Justice Roberts calling the distinction between coordinated spending and direct contributions a “fiction,” and Justice Sotomayor warning that removing caps could enable corruption and circumvention of contribution limits. The Republican‑led FEC signaled it favors striking the caps and Roman Martinez was appointed to defend the law, while Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris rejected the view that the limits were imposed solely to prevent corruption.
📌 Key Facts
- The Supreme Court heard a GOP-backed challenge seeking to strike federal limits on coordinated party expenditures (party spending caps).
- Plaintiffs named in the challenge include then‑Senate candidate JD Vance, then‑Rep. Steve Chabot, and the Republican National Senate and House campaign committees (NRSC and NRCC).
- For the 2023–24 cycle, reported coordinated party expenditure caps range from $61,800–$123,000 for House races and $123,600–$3.7 million for Senate races.
- Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh signaled support for striking the limits; Kavanaugh emphasized that campaign‑finance rules have weakened political parties relative to outside groups.
- Chief Justice John Roberts questioned the legal distinction between coordinated expenditures and direct contributions, calling that distinction a "fiction."
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that removing the cap could enable corruption and allow donors to circumvent individual contribution limits.
- Reports say the Federal Election Commission under President Trump agreed the limits should be struck; Roman Martinez was appointed to defend the law, and Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris rejected the view that the caps were imposed solely to prevent corruption.
📊 Relevant Data
In the 2023-2024 election cycle, political party committees reported total disbursements of $2.646 billion.
Statistical Summary of 24-Month Campaign Activity of the 2023-2024 Election Cycle — FEC.gov
Individuals can contribute up to $41,300 per calendar year to a national party committee's main account, but can make unlimited contributions to super PACs.
Contribution limits for 2023-2024 — FEC.gov
The Watergate scandal involved illegal campaign contributions and a secret donor list, leading to prosecutions and the 1974 amendments to FECA that imposed contribution limits to prevent corruption.
The other Watergate scandal, that changed campaign finance in America — NPR
📰 Sources (2)
- CBS details the current coordinated party expenditure caps: $61,800–$123,000 for House races and $123,600–$3.7 million for Senate races in the 2023–24 cycle.
- Identifies the plaintiffs as then‑Senate candidate JD Vance, then‑Rep. Steve Chabot, and the NRSC/NRCC.
- Reports that Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh signaled support for striking the limits, with Kavanaugh emphasizing that campaign‑finance rules have weakened political parties relative to outside groups.
- Notes Chief Justice Roberts questioned the distinction between coordinated expenditures and direct contributions, calling it a 'fiction.'
- Quotes Justice Sotomayor warning that removing the cap could enable corruption and donor circumvention of contribution limits.
- Confirms the FEC under President Trump agrees the limits should be struck and that Roman Martinez was appointed to defend the law; adds that Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris rejected the view that the caps were imposed solely to prevent corruption.