Appeals Court Denies GOP Challenge to Campaign Spending Limits

On September 5, a federal appeals court upheld campaign spending limits, rejecting a Republican challenge led by Vice presidential candidate Sen. JD Vance. The court maintained that the U.S. Supreme Court's 2001 ruling, which deemed these limits constitutional under the First Amendment, remains in effect. The plaintiffs argued that the ruling was based on flawed reasoning, suggesting that coordinated expenditures by political party committees should not be treated like contributions to candidates. However, the majority opinion emphasized that only the Supreme Court has the authority to overturn its previous decisions. The ruling highlighted that while Congress has introduced new exemptions to the coordinated expenditure limits, these changes do not invalidate the constitutional nature of the limits themselves. U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who wrote the majority opinion, pointed out that the Supreme Court has not retracted its earlier decision, and it is not the role of lower courts to challenge its authority. Some judges expressed differing views, with Judge John Bush suggesting that the Supreme Court should reconsider the 2001 ruling due to its conflict with more recent decisions. Conversely, Judge Chad Readler dissented, arguing that the evolving legal landscape necessitates a reevaluation of the spending restrictions, which he believes violate the First Amendment. The Federal Election Commission chose not to comment on the ruling, and the legal representatives for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests for comment. This decision underscores the ongoing debate over campaign finance laws and the balance between free speech and regulatory limits on political spending.