WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is set to consider a Republican-driven initiative, supported by the Trump administration, aiming to dismantle the restrictions on the amount political parties can coordinate to spend with congressional and presidential campaign candidates.
On Monday, the justices decided to review an appellate court’s decision that upheld an over 50-year-old federal election law provision, despite Democratic appeals to maintain the law. Notably, the Supreme Court itself supported the provision in 2001. However, since Chief Justice John Roberts’ appointment in 2005, the court’s conservative majority has dismantled numerous congressionally approved limitations concerning election fundraising and expenditures. The 2010 Citizens United ruling by the court notably authorized unlimited independent expenditures in federal elections.
Proponents of the law have expressed concerns that eliminating party spending limits would enable large donors to bypass caps on individual donations to candidates by funneling unlimited amounts to political parties with the expectation that these funds would support specific candidates.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on the case in the fall. Richard Hasen, a renowned election law expert at UCLA law school, anticipates the court might overturn the limits. He suggested that considering the prevailing influence of super PAC spending undermining political parties and fostering increased corruption and inequality, the dismantling of limits might seem reasonable now.
Though the Justice Department typically upholds federal laws challenged in court, the Trump administration has informed the court that this situation deserves an unusual exception because it firmly believes the law infringes upon First Amendment free-speech protections.
The lawsuit was initiated in Ohio in 2022 by Republican House and Senate campaign committees, accompanied by two Ohio Republicans in Congress at the time: then-Senator J.D. Vance, who is now Vice President, and then-Representative Steve Chabot. By 2025, coordinated party expenditure for Senate races varies from $127,200 in several smaller states to nearly $4 million for California. For House races, spending limits are set at $127,200 in states with a single representative and $63,600 elsewhere.
Additionally, the court agreed to mediate a dispute between the internet service provider, Cox Communications, and several record labels concerning unauthorized music downloads by Cox subscribers.
The justices will examine a lower-court decision in a lawsuit led by Sony Music Entertainment, arguing that Cox must terminate the accounts of customers who download unlicensed music to avoid liability for future instances of digital piracy. Initially, a jury held Cox responsible for over $1 billion; however, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that verdict. The Supreme Court dismissed the record labels’ appeal to contest that aspect of the ruling.