It is fair, I think, to say that a substantial majority of those who heard the argument in the case of Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate doubted that, irrespective of whatever they might think of Ted Cruz, it was highly likely that he and his campaign organization would prevail in challenging the federal campaign finance law limitation on the use of post-election funds to repay a candidate's personal loans as violative of the First Amendment rights of candidates who want to make expenditures on behalf of their own candidacy through personal loans. But, by a six-three division between the Court's judicial conservatives and liberals, that is precisely what has occurred. Those who criticize the Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), likely will feel much the same way about the Cruz case.
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- Authors Predict an Increase in the Use of State Court Receivership Proceedings
- DOJ Criminal Fraud Section’s Annual Health Care Fraud Enforcement Action: “We Are a Target-Rich Environment”
- Chevron Exploded, Capitol Demonstrators Freed, Homeless Penalized—Film at Eleven - SCOTUS Today
- Term Ends with Both Bangs and Whimpers, All Highly Consequential - SCOTUS Today
- Another Leak Confirmed and Other Important Decisions and Divisions Issued, but Not Loper or Trump - SCOTUS Today