OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case from Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz regarding campaign finance laws.
The nation’s highest court will consider a case regarding the “Federal Election Commission’s bid to restore a campaign finance law that caps the amount of money that candidates can be reimbursed for personal loans to their campaigns in a challenge brought by Cruz.”
“Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration, acting on behalf of the FEC, appealed a lower court ruling that found that the cap violates the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech by unjustifiably burdening political expression,” Reuters reported.
“The case involves a provision of a 2002 campaign finance law that limits the amount of money that candidates can accept from donors after an election as they try to recoup the money they personally lent to their formal campaign organizations. The measure – part of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act – imposes a ceiling of $250,000 on payments from donations made after an election even if candidates made loans exceeding that sum,” Reuters added.
“Cruz sued the FEC, challenging the constitutionality of the law that the agency enforces, after his successful 2018 Senate re-election race in Texas 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. The commission has said the law reduces what is known as quid pro quo corruption – a Latin phrase meaning a favor for a favor – and the appearance of corruption by limiting the amount of money solicited by candidates after an election to repay campaign debt,” the report added.
“Cruz has a First Amendment right to loan money to his campaign free from governmental restrictions as to amount and time of repayment,” Cruz’s lawyers wrote in their brief in the case.
“That Cruz could have avoided his $10,000 loss by refusing to loan his campaign more than $250,000, or by requiring repayment in full within 20 days, does not change the fact that he suffered a $10,000 injury by exercising his constitutional right to make the loan that he did,” they added in the brief.
Steve Guest, a spokesperson for Cruz, released a statement praising sed the court’s decision to hear the case.
“Existing FEC rules benefit incumbent politicians and the super-wealthy by making it harder for challengers to run for office,” Guest said.
Last week, the Supreme Court has scheduled arguments for Dec. 1 regarding a Mississippi case that seeks to overturn Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion in the country.
“The Supreme Court on Monday set Dec. 1 arguments on Mississippi’s ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy — a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade,” Politico reported.
“Mississippi’s ban has been blocked by lower courts because it directly violates Roe’s protections for pre-viability abortions. The hearing would come after justices this month allowed Texas to move forward with a near-total abortion ban,” Politico added.
“In taking the Mississippi case, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority clearly signaled its openness to revisit and potentially overturning the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide, with a ruling expected next year. Justices said they want to hear arguments on whether all bans on abortion before a fetus can survive outside the womb are unconstitutional. Earlier this summer, Mississippi petitioned the court to overturn Roe, contradicting the state’s previous argument that it could uphold the 15-week ban without touching the nearly 50-year-old precedent,” the report added.
