Latest news with #SteveChabot
Yahoo
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme court to hear case that could further erode campaign spending limits
The US supreme court agreed on Monday to hear a case that could further erode restrictions on money in politics, in a challenge that comes in part from Vice-President JD Vance. The National Republican Senatorial Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee, Vance and Steve Chabot, a former Republican congressman from Ohio, are challenging limits set on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates. The case was filed when Vance was a senatorial candidate, in 2022. The court's landmark Citizens United ruling in 2010 threw away limits on outside spending on elections, allowing corporations and unions to inject unlimited money into elections as a matter of free speech. The current challenge from Republicans makes a similar argument, claiming that limits on how much spending can be coordinated with a campaign impede their first amendment rights. It also comes at a time where unfettered outside spending has become a norm in US politics. The case is challenging limits to what is called 'coordinated' spending between a party and the campaign, while independent expenditures, those often made by political action committees, have been unlimited since Citizens United. The limits themselves vary depending on population and which office a candidate is seeking. On the low end, a candidate for the US House of Representatives in a state with multiple representatives would be limited to $63,600, while a Senatecandidate in a state with a large voting age population would be nearly $4m. The US court of appeals for the sixth circuit upheld the limits based on a prior supreme court ruling in 2001 on coordinated spending, but the plaintiffs have argued this 2001 decision is outdated given other more recent campaign finance decisions. The Trump administration filed a brief in the case that aligned with Republicans, and the justice department called on the supreme court to consider the case. Democratic groups have asked to intervene to defend the existing limits. The case will be heard in the court's next term, which starts in October. ScotusBlog, the much-watched website written by lawyers and legal scholars, says the case 'may be the first potential blockbuster of October term 2025'.
Yahoo
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court to hear Vance, GOP effort to strike down campaign finance provision
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take up Vice President Vance and GOP committees' bid to strike down federal limits on political parties' spending made in coordination with campaigns. It sets the stage for a major campaign finance battle during the court's next annual term, which begins in October. Twenty-four years ago, the Supreme Court upheld 'coordinated party expenditure limits,' which were originally passed as part of broader campaign finance reforms in the 1970s. As a senator, Vance in 2022 commenced a new attempt to topple the limits under the First Amendment's free speech protections by suing alongside former Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). In their petition to the high court, the plaintiffs said it is 'past time' to clarify the earlier decision or overrule it outright. 'And it likely marks the last chance this Court will get to tackle the question for quite some time, as neither committees nor candidates will squander their limited resources on another challenge if this petition is denied,' their attorneys at Jones Day wrote. The challenged provision limits how the Republican National Committee, Democratic National Committee (DNC) and committees can spend their funds when they're cooperating with a candidate. The Supreme Court has invalidated limits on committees' spending made independently from campaigns under the First Amendment, but it has declined to do so for coordinated expenses. In 2024, committees could spend between $123,600 and roughly $3.8 million in coordination with Senate candidates and between $61,800 and $123,600 for House candidates, depending on the size of their state. The Trump administration abandoned defending the provision's constitutionality and supported Vance's ask that the Supreme Court to take up the challenge. 'A party performs that function most effectively in cooperation with the candidates themselves. By restricting that cooperation, the party-expenditure limit severely burdens the rights of parties and candidates alike,' Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in court filings, telling the justices they should appoint outside counsel to argue the other side. Days later, the DNC, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee jointly asked to be the ones to defend the spending limits, a move no one opposed. 'The Solicitor General's reversal leaves the 50-year-old limitation on coordinated spending by political parties, and this Court's 24-year-old precedent upholding it, entirely undefended before the Court,' it wrote in court filings. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Guardian
30-06-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Supreme court to hear case that could further erode campaign spending limits
The US supreme court agreed on Monday to hear a case that could further erode restrictions on money in politics, in a challenge that comes in part from Vice-President JD Vance. The National Republican Senatorial Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee, Vance and Steve Chabot, a former Republican congressman from Ohio, are challenging limits set on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates. The case was filed when Vance was a senatorial candidate, in 2022. The court's landmark Citizens United ruling in 2010 threw away limits on outside spending on elections, allowing corporations and unions to inject unlimited money into elections as a matter of free speech. The current challenge from Republicans makes a similar argument, claiming that limits on how much spending can be coordinated with a campaign impede their first amendment rights. It also comes at a time where unfettered outside spending has become a norm in US politics. The case is challenging limits to what's called 'coordinated' spending between a party and the campaign, while independent expenditures, those often made by political action committees, have been unlimited since Citizens United. The limits themselves vary depending on population and which office a candidate is seeking. On the low end, a candidate for the US House of Representatives in a state with multiple representatives would be limited to $63,600, while a Senatecandidate in a state with a large voting age population would be nearly $4m. The US court of appeals for the sixth circuit upheld the limits based on a prior supreme court ruling in 2001 on coordinated spending, but the plaintiffs have argued this 2001 decision is outdated given other more recent campaign finance decisions. The Trump administration filed a brief in the case that aligned with Republicans, and the justice department called on the supreme court to consider the case. Democratic groups have asked to intervene to defend the existing limits. The case will be heard in the court's next term, which starts in October. ScotusBlog, the much-watched website written by lawyers and legal scholars, says the case 'may be the first potential blockbuster of October term 2025'.
Axios
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Axios
Supreme Court will take up Republican challenge to campaign finance restrictions
The Supreme Court will take up a challenge brought by Republicans that aims to strike limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with individual candidates. Why it matters: The case gives the high court an opening to further chip away at campaign finance restrictions erected decades ago. The law's supporters argue without the restrictions, large donors could sidestep individual contribution caps. Driving the news: The justices said Monday they would review a ruling from an appeals court that upheld a decades-old federal election law provision on coordinated party expenditures, one that the Supreme Court itself affirmed in 2001. The justices will hear oral arguments in the case in the fall. Coordinated party expenditure limits vary depending on a state's voting age population and the office sought. By the numbers: In 2025, the expenditure limits range from $127,200 to $3,946,100 for Senate nominees. For House races, the caps are $127,200 in states with only one representative and $63,600 in all other states. Catch up quick: The National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee filed the lawsuit in 2022, joined by then-Sen. JD Vance and former Rep. Steve Chabot, another Ohio Republican. An appeals court upheld the provision, citing the Supreme Court's 2001 ruling in the FEC v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee case. Zoom out: The Trump administration noted to the court in a May brief that while the Justice Department has "a longstanding policy of defending challenged federal statutes," it believes this is "the rare case that warrants an exception to that general approach."
Washington Post
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Supreme Court will hear challenge to limits on political party spending
The Supreme Court will hear a significant campaign finance case next term that will examine whether it violates the Constitution to restrict the amount of money that political parties can spend in coordination with individual candidates. The national Republican senatorial and congressional committees, then-Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) and then-Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) filed suit over the limits in 2022, saying they conflict with the free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.
