TOP News

Politics: Ted Cruz's campaign finance rule challenge gets its day at the Supreme Court

Democrats race to squash Cruz's Nord Stream 2 sanctions bill

  Democrats race to squash Cruz's Nord Stream 2 sanctions bill Senate Democrats are scrambling to try to squash legislation from Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to slap sanctions on businesses linked to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which will carry gas from Russia to Germany.State Department officials, at the invitation of Senate Democrats opposed to Cruz's bill, on Monday night briefed a group of Democrats, including senators viewed as swing votes on the GOP sanctions bills that will get a vote this week. To pass the bill through the Senate, Cruz will need to the support of at least 10 Democratic senators. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.

The Supreme Court will revisit the issue of campaign finance Wednesday, hearing a challenge brought by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas to a federal cap on candidates using political contributions to recoup personal loans they make to their campaigns.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, questions US Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger during a Senate Rules and Administration Committee oversight hearing on the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol on Wednesday, January 5, 2022, in Washington. © Tom Williams/AP Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, questions US Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger during a Senate Rules and Administration Committee oversight hearing on the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol on Wednesday, January 5, 2022, in Washington.

A high court ruling in Cruz's favor could further erode the 20-year-old law that governs how elections are funded. The Supreme Court already has chipped away at it, granting corporations and unions the right to spend unlimited amounts to influence candidate elections in its 2010 Citizens United decision.

Dems torpedo Cruz’s bid to sanction Russian pipeline

  Dems torpedo Cruz’s bid to sanction Russian pipeline A nearly party-line vote scuttled the Texas senator's attempt to punish Putin, but a new bill is waiting in the wings.The nearly party-line vote, 55-44, came after an aggressive effort by the Biden administration to limit Democratic defections on the legislation, which the White House viewed as a bid to undercut its strategy to deter a Russian invasion. In the end, six Democrats — many of them vulnerable to GOP challengers in November — and all Republicans but one backed the legislation, falling short of the requisite 60 votes.

In 2008, the justices also struck down the so-called millionaire's amendment that aimed to level the playing field when wealthy candidates financed their own campaigns. That provision had relaxed contribution limits for opponents of self-funded candidates in an attempt to close the funding gap.

In the case at hand, campaign finance regulators at the Federal Election Commission argue that the cap is necessary to protect against corruption, but a three-judge appeallate court ruled in favor of Cruz last year, holding that the loan-repayment restriction violates his First Amendment right to free speech.

"A candidate's loan to his campaign is an expenditure that may be used for expressive acts," the court said, in an opinion written by DC Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Neomi Rao, who was appointed to preside over the trial court-level panel. She and DC District Court Judges Amit Mehta and Timothy Kelly ruled unanimously.

Analysis: Joe Biden and Democrats run up against relentless conservative power

  Analysis: Joe Biden and Democrats run up against relentless conservative power Democrats control Washington but President Joe Biden is staring at a wall of conservative power, accrued over years and wielded with a ruthlessness and zeal for rule-breaking that his own party has rarely matched. © Jose Luis Magana/AP President Joe Biden speaks to the media after meeting privately with Senate Democrats, Thursday, Jan. 13, 2022, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana) The President's struggles to implement his strategy to protect US democracy and reshape the economy to help working Americans are hampered by divisions in his own party.

"Such expressive acts are burdened when a candidate is inhibited from making a personal loan, or incurring one, out of concern that she will be left holding the bag on any unpaid campaign debt," the ruling added.

RELATED: Gorsuch declines to wear mask, as bench-mate Sotomayor works from her office

Federal law allows candidate to make loans to their campaign committees without limit. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, however, imposes a $250,000 limit on a campaign committee's ability to repay those loans with money contributed by donors after the election.

A day before he was reelected in 2018, Cruz loaned his campaign committee $260,000, $10,000 over the limit -- laying the foundation for his legal challenge to the cap.

Charles Cooper, a lawyer for Cruz, told the Supreme Court in briefs that "no First Amendment right is more vital in our constitutional democracy than the freedom of a candidate to speak without legislative limit on behalf of his own candidacy."

The Supreme Court can’t get its story straight on vaccines

  The Supreme Court can’t get its story straight on vaccines The Court is barely even pretending to be engaged in legal reasoning.The first, National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, blocks a Biden administration rule requiring most workers to either get vaccinated against Covid-19 or to routinely be tested for the disease. The second, Biden v. Missouri, backs a more modest policy requiring most health care workers to get the vaccine.

The law, "by substantially increasing the risk that any candidate loan will never be fully repaid—forces a candidate to think twice before making those loans in the first place," Cooper wrote.

The Biden administration supports the limits, saying the Cruz loan was made with the "sole and exclusive motivation" of triggering the lawsuit. The administration and campaign finance watchdogs argue that striking down the provision could open the door to corruption of public officials.

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the justices that the "modest burden" in the law is "tailored to serve Congress' compelling interest in preventing actual and apparent quid pro quo corruption." She said contributions that repay a candidate's personal loans pose a heightened risk of corruption "because, like gifts, and unlike routine contributions, they add to the recipient's personal wealth."

"The post-election context magnifies that risk of corruption," Prelogar wrote.

Campaign finance watchdogs support the cap, arguing it is necessary to block undue influence by special interests, particularly because the fundraising would occur once the candidate has become a sitting member of Congress.

"The limit is a straightforward anti-corruption measure," Daniel Weiner and John Martin, lawyers for the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, said in a statement. "Instead of being independent from donors, a winning candidate -- now an elected official -- is raising money that will go directly into the official's own pocket."

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, at the US Capitol on Wednesday, January 5, 2022, in Washington. © Greg Nash/Pool/Getty Images Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, at the US Capitol on Wednesday, January 5, 2022, in Washington.

Breyer retirement throws curveball into midterms .
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer's upcoming retirement is throwing a curveball into both parties' midterm plans, injecting a highly partisan issue into an already combustible election cycle.Supreme Court nominations have been the subjects of some of the most bitter fights between Democrats and Republicans in recent years, and Democrats are still smarting from the battles over former President Trump's three conservative additions to the bench.

See also