WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court struck down federal limits on coordinated campaign spending between political parties and their candidates, ruling that the decades-old restrictions violate the First Amendment and marking the latest expansion of constitutional protections for political spending ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
In a 6-3 decision issued on June 30, the court sided with the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Vice President JD Vance and other Republican challengers, overturning a 2001 precedent that had upheld the limits as a safeguard against corruption. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the conservative majority, concluded that the coordinated expenditure caps imposed by the Federal Election Campaign Act unconstitutionally burden political speech.
Kavanaugh wrote that the restrictions were not justified because other provisions of federal campaign finance law, including contribution limits, anti-earmarking rules and disclosure requirements, remain in place to address concerns about corruption and circumvention of donation caps. The ruling eliminates limits on how much national and state political party committees may spend in coordination with their federal candidates.
Justice Elena Kagan, joined by the court's two other liberal justices, dissented, arguing that the decision weakens longstanding protections designed to prevent wealthy donors from channeling money through political parties to evade contribution limits. She warned that the ruling revives opportunities for quid pro quo corruption that Congress sought to curb through campaign finance laws.
The case arose from a lawsuit filed in 2022 by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and Republican candidates, including Vance, who at the time was running for the U.S. Senate from Ohio. The challengers argued that the coordinated spending limits infringed on political parties' free speech rights by restricting their ability to work directly with their own nominees.
The decision is expected to reshape campaign finance practices before November's congressional elections. Republican national committees currently hold a substantial fundraising advantage over their Democratic counterparts, although the ruling applies equally to all political parties under federal law. Campaign finance experts have said the decision could encourage parties to assume a larger role in financing coordinated advertising and campaign operations while reducing reliance on some outside groups.
The ruling continues a series of Supreme Court decisions over the past decade and a half that have narrowed campaign finance restrictions on First Amendment grounds, further redefining the balance between political speech and anti-corruption measures in federal elections.
