The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear a challenge to campaign finance restrictions next session stemming from a case brought by Vice President JD Vance over federal limits on what political parties can spend on campaigns.
While he was still a Senate candidate in Ohio, Vance filed a lawsuit in 2022 along with former Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, as well as the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee. They argued the restriction is a violation of the First Amendment.
The court will hear oral arguments for the case and issue a ruling during its next term, which begins in October.
The case seeks to end limits on how much money political party committees can spend on individual candidates. Currently, donors can give less to individual candidates than they can to party committees like the NRSC and NRCC.
The Federal Election Commission under the Trump administration has sided with the Republican challengers in the case.
The Democratic National Committee filed a motion to intervene in the case.
Democrats argue that lifting the limit on donations to federal candidates could open a loophole for donors who could give large amounts of money to party committees knowing it would go to a specific candidate, CNN reported.
The Supreme Court has long debated what restrictions can be placed on campaign spending while still adhering to the Constitution’s free speech protections.
Most notably, the 2010 Citizens United v. FEC ruling allowed independent expenditures by outside groups to spend unlimited amounts of money.
In 2001, the Supreme Court upheld these same restrictions in a different case, meaning it would have to overturn precedent to deliver the GOP a win.
The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the Republicans’ effort last year, noting in its ruling that the decision was due to the Supreme Court never overturning the 2001 decision upholding the spending caps.
The restrictions stem from the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.
As it stands, parties can make unlimited independent expenditures supporting a candidate but there are limits on how much they can spend when coordinating with a candidate’s campaign.
After the Citizens United ruling fueled massive campaign spending, the existing spending caps do little to address the original goal of keeping money out of politics, NBC News noted.
Current spending caps vary based on what office the candidate is seeking, the voting-age population and inflation.