Supreme Court strikes down long-standing campaign finance restrictions
Source: NBC News
June 30, 2026, 10:28 AM EDT / Updated June 30, 2026, 10:34 AM EDT
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down longtime campaign finance rules challenged by Vice President JD Vance that place limits on how much a national political party committee can spend in coordination with individual candidates.
In a 6-3 ruling authored by conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court found that the restrictions violate free speech rights under the Constitution's First Amendment, based on the theory that political spending is a form of speech.
The challenge was brought by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and the campaigns of two candidates in the 2022 elections: Vance, who was then running as a Republican candidate for the Senate in Ohio, and then-Rep. Steve Chabot, a Republican congressman from the same state who lost his re-election bid.
The Federal Election Commission, under the Trump administration, sided with the challengers. The Supreme Courts conservative majority has historically been skeptical of campaign finance restrictions on free speech grounds, and Republicans have often brought challenges against them.
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-strikes-long-standing-campaign-finance-restrictions-rcna252593
Link to ORDER (PDF) - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-621_h315.pdf
Article updated.
Original article -
The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the right to citizenship for people born in the United States, rejecting an executive order by President Donald Trump that sought to undo that longstanding constitutional principle for children born to many immigrants.
Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendments Citizenship Clause, the majority decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts said.
Roberts was joined by his fellow conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with the courts three liberal justices, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, in the majority ruling on 14th Amendment grounds.
Another conservative, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, wrote that he did not believe Trumps executive order violated the 14th Amendment, but that it does contravene a federal statute adopted in 1940 that addresses the citizenship of people born in the U.S.
The courts justices had signaled during oral arguments in April that they would affirm that individuals born in the United States to non-U.S. citizens are automatically granted citizenship.
underpants
(197,887 posts)Wednesdays
(23,496 posts)If The Felon gets to replace just ONE of the Democratic-appointed justices, the outcome will be different.
SamuelAdams
(377 posts)If political spending is free speech, what can Congress do to get money out of politics? Short of a Constitutional amendment, it seems nothing. For a group who claims to be originalists, they sure don't care what the Framers thought about money in politics.
slightlv
(8,220 posts)government again. Right now, only tech bros and the rich and corporations control government by speech (money). We're locked out because we don't have the money to buy our speech. This is exactly opposite what the founders aimed for. We're going to have to strip this government down to bare bones and build it back in the way We, the People need it to be. Croak, Mr. Prez, please Croak!
Initech
(109,692 posts)Fuck the billionaires!
J_William_Ryan
(3,669 posts)Not that any such reform was going to happen due to Citizens United.
Laws will be enacted in accordance with the wishes of the highest bidder.
Timewas
(2,816 posts)These greedy fucks are now getting a key to the bank,just what is needed is more "speech" for these crooked assholes to get richer while not doing their jobs
CaptainTruth
(8,315 posts)...individual candidates," but does it have any effect on PACs or other entities that aren't "a national political party committee"?
BumRushDaShow
(173,772 posts)based on the First Amendment, which today's ruling echos.
CaptainTruth
(8,315 posts)BumRushDaShow
(173,772 posts)but Citizens United stems from that-named group creating this long-form "ad" and demanding the right to air it -

CaptainTruth
(8,315 posts)I don't know about you, but I have a business to run & it keeps me so busy that even though I'm intensely interested in politics, I find it hard to keep up with everything, especially during the Trump 2.0 Regime. Trump has truly unleashed the "Firehose of Shit," it's clearly the strategy of him/GOP & it's designed to overwhelm opponents because so much bad shit is happening... no one can keep up with it all. 😪
groundloop
(14,007 posts)President Obama was right, Citizens United was a horrible decision and this is just more of the same. Big business and the ultra wealthy own us now.
Quanto Magnus
(1,427 posts)been considered 'speech'...
Marthe48
(23,790 posts)and are trying to hedge their bets with the safeguard Amerikan voter eligibility act, fascists trying their damnedest to protect the return on their money by fixing every election.
If we don't want fascism, let's act like each of our votes has a value of a billion dollars and use it in every election.
Buddyzbuddy
(3,065 posts)Or, for 30 pieces of silver you can get a gen-u-ine Supreme Court Justice.
Exp
(1,074 posts)equation at the base of it. Neither rational nor reasonable, and mathematically unsound.
Exp
(1,074 posts)Kid Berwyn
(25,544 posts)Democracy depends on ideas, not dollars.