IG10054 — Campaign Finance Law and the U.S. Supreme Court

/ For more information, see CRS Report R45320, Campaign Finance Law: An Analysis of Key Issues, Recent Developments, and Constitutional Considerations for Legislation, by L. Paige Whitaker (2023). Information as of May 31, 2024. Prepared by L. Paige Whitaker, Legislative Attorney; Amanda M. Black, Paralegal Specialist; and Juan Pablo Madrid, Visual Information Specialist. 1 FECA establishes contribution limits, which refer to how much a donor can contribute Contribution limits What has the Supreme Court said about contribution limits? The Supreme Court held that limits on contributions and expenditures implicate First Amendment free speech rights and that such limits must serve the governmental interest in avoiding quid pro quo corruption or its appearance Contribution: Involves giving money to an entity, such as a candidate’s campaign committee Independent Expenditures (IE): Involves spending money directly for advocacy of the election or defeat of a candidate, independently of any candidate or political party Disclaimer and disclosure requirements FECA contains disclaimer and disclosure requirements What has the Supreme Court said about disclaimer and disclosure requirements? The Supreme Court held that disclaimer requirements “insure that the voters are fully informed about the person or group who is speaking” Disclosure: Requires that political committees register with the FEC and comply with periodic reporting requirements Disclaimers: Requires that statements of attribution appear directly on campaign-related communications Source restrictions FECA contains several bans, referred to as source restrictions, on who may make campaign contributions What has the Supreme Court said about banning foreign money? The Supreme Court summarily armed a three-judge federal district court ruling that upheld FECA’s foreign money ban against a First Amendment challenge and that identi-ed a compelling governmental interest in limiting foreign citizens’ inuence over U.S. elections Corporate/Union Contributions: Bans contributions directly from treasury funds; must establish a political action committee (PAC) to make contributions Foreign Money: Bans contributions and IEs by foreign nationals 1972 FECA of 1971 Established reporting and disclosure requirements 1974 FECA of 1974 Made signi-cant amendments in response to Watergate; established the Federal Election Commission (FEC) 1976 Buckley v. Valeo Upheld FECA’s limits and disclosure requirements and invalidated IE limits 1976 FECA of 1976 Made amendments in response to Buckley 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) Made comprehensive amendments to FECA, including disclaimer and disclosure requirements 2003 McConnell v. FEC Invalidated FECA’s ban on minors’ contributions and requirement that parties choose between coordinated and independent expenditures; upheld major BCRA provisions 2008 Davis v. FEC Invalidated FECA’s increased contribution limits for candidates whose opponents signi-cantly self--nance 2010 Citizens United v. FEC Invalidated FECA’s ban on corporate and union IEs and electioneering communications, partially overruling McConnell; upheld disclaimer and disclosure requirements 2014 McCutcheon v. FEC Invalidated FECA’s aggregate contribution limits 2012 Bluman v. FEC Summarily armed a lower court ruling that upheld FECA’s ban on foreign money 2022 FEC v. Ted Cruz for Senate Invalidated FECA’s cap on contributions used to repay candidate loans Campaign Finance Law and the U.S. Supreme Court Federal campaign -nance law is composed of three primary components: Contribution limits Disclosure and disclaimer requirements Source restrictions While the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) sets forth the statutory provisions governing these components, several Supreme Court rulings have had a signi-cant impact on the regulatory scope of FECA.1

Curated by CRS — every bill listed in this report's relatedMaterials. Edge type cited_in_report, gold confidence.

No bill citations on file.