The Supreme Court is considering whether to overturn a 25-year-old decision that limits how much political parties can spend on candidates.
The Republican-led challenge is backed by the Trump administration. The case involves a 2001 ruling that upheld federal election law designed to prevent large donors from skirting contribution caps.
The question being posed to the Supreme Court is do federal coordinated party expenditure limits violate the First Amendment?
Democrats are calling on the court to uphold the law. A federal appeals court agreed with the Democrats' arguments in upholding the law.
RELATED STORY | Supreme Court to hear GOP-backed case on lifting party spending limits
The Federal Election Commission and the GOP argue the court should take a skeptical view of the limits. The conservative majority has previously struck down various campaign finance restrictions, including the 2010 Citizens United decision that opened the door to unlimited independent spending.
Former Sen. Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat who partnered with then-Sen. John McCain, to pass campaign finance reform, urged the Court to uphold the limits.
"A representative democracy to thrive, elected officials must be responsive to their constituents and avoid even the appearance of corruption. Campaign finance regulation exists to reinforce these guardrails. Yet, for years, opponents of regulation have persistently chiseled away at the limits established to prevent excessive campaign cash from corrupting our elections," wrote attorneys for Feingold in a brief to the Supreme Court.
RELATED STORY | The History Of Campaign Financing
