Keywords: campaign finance, contribution limits, Federal Election Campaign Act, donors

In a significant campaign finance decision, the Supreme Court struck down one of the key limits on federal campaign contributions. The Court's decision in McCutcheon v. FEC eliminated the two-year aggregate campaign contribution limits, one of the pillars of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended.

Before McCutcheon, individual donors were prohibited from contributing more than $48,600 to all federal candidates and $74,600 to all federal political action committees and federal party committees for a total cap of $123,200 during a two-year election cycle. In McCutcheon, the Supreme Court ruled that the aggregate limits infringed on political speech that is protected by the First Amendment.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts opined that "Congress may regulate campaign contributions to protect against corruption or the appearance of corruption," but the aggregate limits did not serve the purpose of combating corruption.1 While the McCutcheon decision eliminates the aggregate limits, the individual limits remain in place. For the current 2013-2014 election cycle, the base federal limits for individuals are:

Limit

Recipient

$2,600

Candidate or candidate committee per election. Primary and general elections are treated as separate elections.

$32,400

National party committee measured per calendar year.

$10,000

State, district and local party committees (for federal elections). The $10,000 limit is in aggregate, per calendar year.

$5,000

Any other committee per calendar year. This includes political action committees.

Though McCutcheon only addresses the federal aggregate limits, many states have similar laws. Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Wisconsin and Wyoming all have aggregate limits, with some restricted to one-year cycles. Some municipalities also have aggregate limits, including Washington, DC, and San Francisco. Each of these laws may be challenged and are at risk of being struck down based on the Court's reasoning in McCutcheon. Several states have started reviewing whether or not to continue enforcing their aggregate limits. The Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance announced that it will stop enforcing the Commonwealth's aggregate limits on donations to individual candidates.

McCutcheon highlights the rapidly changing nature of campaign finance regulation in the United States. Campaign finance compliance at the federal, state and local levels remains rife with challenges as regulatory schemes continue to evolve. Contributions should always be vetted in advance to ensure compliance at all levels.

Learn more about our Government Relations practice.

Footnote

1 McCutcheon v. FEC, 572 U.S. ____, slip op. at 1 (2014) (citing Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 26-27 (1976)).

Originally published April 8, 2014

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2014. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.