WASHINGTON, D.C., July 1, 2026 – Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, voting 6–3 to overturn limitations on how much political parties can spend on candidates during elections. This opinion overturns a precedent set 25 years ago in a similar case called Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee and practically invites private donors to use political parties as a conduit to funnel massive amounts of money toward their preferred candidates.
Writing for the majority, Justice Kavanaugh reiterates the Court’s understanding that money spent on speech is itself speech and must be protected by the First Amendment. Because the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) limits political parties’ coordinated expenditures with candidates, the Court concludes it thus restricts their speech. The Court recognizes concerns about quid pro quo corruption from mega-donors but finds it unpersuasive.
Justice Kagan and the liberal justices, however, point out that was the entire point of FECA for over half a century. “The law’s theory is simple,” Kagan writes. “A candidate may be induced to trade official acts for campaign contributions — and the bigger the contribution, the stronger both the candidate’s temptation and the public’s suspicion.” Overturning this law is “enabling a party to serve as an alternative checking account for a campaign” and thus, “the Court ushers back in the same opportunities for quid pro quo corruption that the contribution limits were meant to check.” She goes on to outline specific ways such corruption could play out, to which the majority has no response. “To count on disclosure to prevent corruption is as much as to give up on the goal itself,” Kagan warns, adding, “Which is, sad to say, what this Court does today.”
Alliance for Justice President Rachel Rossi issued the following statement:
“The Supreme Court’s decision, under the auspices of free speech, will instead take the United States one step closer to oligarchy. The Court’s conservative justices either do not understand or do not care that opening the spigot to overwhelming billionaire donations into political parties directly undermines democracy. This decision proves yet again that this Court serves the rich and powerful, undermining decades of precedent for their benefit. It creates a mafia-like loophole for the wealthy to buy elections and directly enrich political parties. What a joke to claim that speech is free when inviting bids to sell it for the highest price.”