Supreme Court loosens campaign finance laws, opening up flood of midterm cash

The Supreme Court struck down limits on coordinated spending between candidates and political parties on Tuesday, a win for Republicans that will fundamentally change how tens of millions of dollars are spent in congressional elections. The decision will have an almost immediate impact on the midterms. Removing the limit on coordinated spending effectively gives candidates direct control over a far greater amount of money being spent on their races. It is also likely to increase the flood of political advertising that hits the airwaves each fall. The 6-3 decision, which divided the court along its usual ideological lines, held that the limits violate the First Amendment. The decision is a blow to Democrats, who argued that eliminating the limit on coordination would put more power into the hands of large donors who can cut bigger checks to party committees than to candidates. Republicans tend to get more money from large donors, while Democrats have been more reliant on small-dollar donors. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, called the limits a “severe infringement on First Amendment-protected political speech.” He also argued the ruling eliminating the limits could bolster political parties generally. “To uphold the political-party coordinated-expenditure limits here could therefore help consign political parties to continued second-tier status as compared to outside groups,” Kavanaugh wrote. “Weakened political parties distort the political system.” President Donald Trump hailed the ruling allowing parties to spend unlimited amounts in coordination with individual campaigns. “The Supreme Court just took restrictions off political spending!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “A BIG WIN FOR REPUBLICANS and, more importantly, The First Amendment!” The National Republican Senatorial Committee brought the case seeking to overturn the limits in 2022 alongside now-Vice President J.D. Vance’s Senate campaign. Trump’s Justice Department declined to defend the la