All of America is waiting for the Supreme Court to release a number of ground-breaking rulings. Last week, the court revealed it was set to release “one or more” rulings today.
It seems they are holding off that one ruling and addressing other important cases. One of them came from Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, who was challenging a campaign finance law.
Cruz claimed the law was wrongfully punishing him. And the court, in a 6-3 ruling, backed the senator.
From The Hill:
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled for Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in his legal challenge to federal limits on the amount of money candidates can raise from donors to pay off their personal debt after an election.
The court struck down a $250,000 cap on the amount of post-election funds a candidate can be repaid for personal loans they made to their campaign, finding that the restriction violated the First Amendment.
The 6-3 ruling split along familiar ideological lines, with the court’s conservatives siding with Cruz over a dissent from the court’s three liberals.
Boom! Here’s one for the good guys. Or, at least, here’s one for people who just want to repay themselves for donating money to their own campaign!
There was a rule in place that set a limit to how much money a candidate’s campaign can use to pay back a donation out of their own pockets.
Previously, a candidate could only use campaign funds to repay $250,000 of their own money donated to the campaign.
It seems an arbitrary rule, one that did not prevent campaign finance fraud. Instead, it seemed to limit who could run for office, based on how much money they were willing to put up to run.
The court’s conservative majority, including Chief Justice Roberts, voted in favor of Cruz.
Roberts wrote the majority opinion, stating that the donation cap violated a candidate’s ability to “facilitate political speech.” Because of that, the rule violated the First Amendment.
Although this might not seem relevant to us peons who don’t have nearly $250,000 to our names, this benefits anyone who wants to run for public office.
This ruling means someone can donate their own money to their campaign, without fear that they’ll go bankrupt. Because, after an election, they can use campaign funds to pay themselves back.
This ruling can help folks who want to run for public office but had previously avoided out of concerns for their livelihood.
And it gives the Texas senator a big win.
Source: The Hill