Supreme Court to consider eliminating political contribution limit

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has agreed to go beyond its controversial Citizens United decision and consider striking down the limit on the total amount that wealthy persons may give to candidates and political parties.

The justices voted to hear an appeal from an Alabama donor and the Republican National Committee, which contends the total contribution limit of $123,200 per election cycle is “unconstitutionally low.”

The case, to be heard in the fall, will focus on a little-known part of the campaign finance laws that set a total limit on contributions by individuals. Under these laws, individuals may give no more than $123,200 for each two-year election cycle. This includes a $2,500 limit for a federal candidate running for office and up to $30,800 per year to the political committees established by the national parties.

If the court were to strike down the limit, wealthy persons could write a single check for more than $1 million a year, which a political party could spread among several hundred candidates who were running for the House and Senate, said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21 and longtime advocate of the campaign finance laws.

Last year, a three-judge court in Washington upheld the limits on the grounds that the Supreme Court has consistently said that contributions to candidates can be restricted.

By contrast, the high court has said individuals may spend freely on their own for political ads and campaign messages. Three years ago, the court cited this free-spending rule in the Citizens United decision and ruled that corporate groups and unions may spend unlimited sums to back candidates.

That decision did not affect the limits on direct contributions to candidates and parties.

The new case, Shaun McCutcheon vs. FEC, is not an attack on the limits an individual may give to a single candidate. Instead, the court will decide on whether Congress had a valid justification for limiting an individual’s total contributions to candidates and parties.

—-

&Copy;2013 Tribune Co.

Visit Tribune Co. at www.latimes.com

Distributed by MCT Information Services

—————

Topics: t000196637,t000002953,t000047694,t000047683,t000138231,t000047681,t000047680

More in Local News

Car crashes near Everett after State Patrol pursuit

The driver and a second person in the car suffered injuries.

They chose the longshot candidate to fill a vacant seat

Sultan Mayor Carolyn Eslick will serve as representative for the 39th legislative district.

Definitely not Christmas in July for parched young trees

“I live in Washington. I should not have to water a Christmas tree,” says one grower. But they did.

Marysville babysitter faces jail time in infant’s death

Medical experts differed over whether it was head trauma or illness that caused the baby to die.

Whether cheers or jeers, DeVos appearance will rouse spirits

Trump’s secretary of education is coming to Bellevue to raise money for a pro-business think tank.

Superior Court judge admits DUI on freeway

Prosecutors recommend a “standard” penalty for Marybeth Dingledy, who “is terribly sorry.”

Self-defense or murder? Trial begins in shooting death

Explanations as to why a man was shot in the back on a Bothell cul-de-sac are starkly different.

A customer walks away after buying a hot dog from a vendor on 33rd St and Smith Street near the Everett Station on Friday. The Everett Station District Alliance pictures the area east of Broadway and south of Hewitt Avenue as a future neighborhood and transit hub that could absorb expected population growth. (Andy Bronson / The Herald)
Alliance plans meeting to discuss future of the Everett Station

Key themes are economic development, parking, green space, safety, and transportation connections

Front Porch

EVENTS Chicken dinner time Seniors serve up a family-style chicken dinner from… Continue reading

Most Read