The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday, 6-3, that federal limits on coordinated campaign spending by political parties and candidates violated the First Amendment.
The decision struck down a provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which limited how much parties could spend in coordination with candidates to reduce corruption. Spending by parties that was not coordinated with candidates had not been subject to those caps.
The court overruled a 2001 decision that had upheld the same limits by a 5-4 vote after a challenge by the Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee. In 2024, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also upheld the restrictions.
The plaintiffs argued that changes in campaign finance law and Supreme Court precedent had undermined the basis for the 2001 ruling.
After Donald Trump took office, the Federal Election Commission declined to defend the challenged provision. The Supreme Court appointed lawyer Roman Martinez to defend it and allowed the Democratic National Committee, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to intervene.
The limits varied by state, with lower caps in less populous states and higher ones in larger states. In 2025, they ranged from about $127,000 to $3.9 million for Senate candidates, and from about $63,000 to $127,000 for House candidates.
The ruling came months before the November midterm elections, as Republicans sought to keep control of Congress. As of the end of May, the Republican National Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee, and National Republican Senatorial Committee held $256 million in cash and no debt, compared with about $126 million for their Democratic counterparts, which also had more than $18 million in debt.
The court issued other election-related rulings this term. On Monday, it let stand state laws allowing some mail ballots received after Election Day to be counted, rejecting a Republican-backed challenge to Mississippi’s five-day grace period. In April, it narrowed a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, clearing the way for Republican-led Southern states to redraw some majority-Black and majority-Latino districts before the midterms.