It has been reported by Fox News that Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, scored a Supreme Court victory on Monday, with a 6-3 ruling that a law limiting how much money raised after an election a campaign can use to repay loans from the candidate was unconstitutional.
Cruz had loaned his 2018 Senate campaign $260,000, but federal election law only allowed campaigns to repay a maximum of $250,000 from post-election funds, and even money raised preelection could only be used within 20 days of the election.
“This limit on the use of post-election funds increases the risk that candidate loans over $250,000 will not be repaid in full, inhibiting candidates from making such loans in the first place,” Chief Justice John Roberts observed in the court’s opinion. Roberts noted that at the time, that had been the most expensive Senate race ever.
The law in question is the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, and it says that any amount above $250,000 that is unpaid shall be considered a campaign contribution. Cruz openly admitted that the express purpose of his loan was to challenge restrictions in the law.
“[T]here is no doubt,” Roberts wrote, “that the law does burden First Amendment electoral speech, and any such law must at least be justified by a permissible interest.”
Ultimately, Roberts determined that the government failed to show that it had “a legitimate objective” for its repayment limit. Fox News reached out to Cruz’s office for comment but they did not immediately respond.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan argued that eliminating this restriction increases the risk of corruption.”In discarding the statute, the Court fuels non-public-serving, self-interested governance. It injures the integrity, both actual and apparent, of the political process,” she wrote.
Reuters went on to report that “In striking down the law today, the court greenlights all the sordid bargains Congress thought right to stop,” Kagan wrote.
Politicians will know that such payments will go directly to them via the campaign, Kagan added, and the donors will hope for something in return.
“The politician is happy; the donors are happy. The only loser is the public. It inevitably suffers from government corruption,” Kagan said.
Cruz, first elected to represent Texas in the Senate in 2012, sued the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the agency that enforces election laws, after his successful 2018 re-election race against Democratic rival Beto O’Rourke. Cruz had lent his campaign organization $260,000 but was limited by the law to a $250,000 reimbursement from his campaign.
A Cruz spokesperson called the ruling a “resounding victory for the First Amendment.” An FEC spokesperson declined to comment.
Trevor Potter, president of Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan group that supports campaign finance laws, expressed disappointment at the ruling.
“Permitting candidates to solicit unlimited post-election contributions to repay their personal campaign loans and put the donor money in their own pockets gives an obvious and lamentable opening for special interests to purchase official favors and rig the political system in their favor,” Potter said.
Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration, acting on behalf of the FEC, had appealed a Washington-based three-judge panel’s 2021 ruling unanimously striking down the provision on free speech grounds.
The provision at issue was part of a major campaign finance law that already has been chipped away at by the Supreme Court including in a landmark 2010 ruling that allowed unlimited independent spending by corporations and unions during elections as constitutionally protected free speech.
The Supreme Court has struck down various provisions of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, often called the McCain-Feingold law in recognition of its main Senate sponsors, John McCain and Russ Feingold.
In finding that the limit was not justified to deter corruption, Roberts endorsed the arguments made by Cruz, saying that restrictions already exist on how much money individuals can donate during an election cycle, currently capped at $2,900. Roberts added that the status quo likely benefited incumbents over challengers because new candidates often have to loan money to their campaigns and can find it more difficult to attract donations.
“This landmark decision will help invigorate our democratic process by making it easier for challengers to take on and defeat career politicians,” Cruz’s spokesperson said.
Cruz unsuccessfully sought his party’s 2016 presidential nomination, later becoming a prominent supporter of former President Donald Trump.
