JD Vance, the Vice President-elect, alongside Republican committees, has petitioned the Supreme Court to strike down federal restrictions on coordinated spending between political parties and candidates, arguing that these limits infringe upon First Amendment rights.
The existing contribution limits for candidates remain lower compared to party committees like the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), which joined the lawsuit alongside former Representative Steve Chabot (R-Ohio).
Republicans challenge federal restrictions on campaign coordination funding
In their petition released Friday, the plaintiffs contended that political parties are fundamentally designed to support their candidates in elections. However, they argued, Congress has imposed severe constraints on party spending for coordinated campaign efforts, limiting their ability to fulfill this essential purpose.
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) chose not to comment on the pending litigation. Under the current rules for the 2024 election cycle, a candidate can only accept $3,300 per donor per election, while the NRSC, by contrast, can receive up to $578,200 from a single donor for the same period.
These limits were originally enacted to mitigate corruption risks and prevent disproportionate influence by wealthy donors. In September, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Vance and the GOP committees, citing a previous 2001 Supreme Court decision that upheld the existing limits.
Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton emphasized that lower courts are bound by Supreme Court precedents, stating it is the high court’s role—not theirs—to overturn prior rulings, even when new legal reasoning challenges their foundation. The plaintiffs urged the Supreme Court to hear the case, insisting that the restrictions violate the constitutional rights of both parties and candidates.
They argued that these limits have damaged the political system by diverting donor contributions to other avenues, super PACs. This move, they claimed, has reduced the influence of political parties, leading to increased polarization and fragmentation within American politics.
