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
- Key Takeaways From Recent Amendments to the New Jersey Court Rules
- The Department of Justice’s COVID-19 Enforcement Task Force 2024 Report: A Continued Commitment to Combatting COVID-19-Related Fraud
- Dissecting the New FTC Final Rule That Regulates “Fake Reviews” and More
- DOJ Launches the Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program
- Making the Lawyer-Client Relationship Work in Challenging Litigation – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast