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
- Quashing an Out-of-State Subpoena: No Easy Task
- The Sleeping Giant: New York’s Commercial Division Expert Disclosure Rules
- Commission Commitments: Massachusetts Appeals Court Upholds Obligation to Continue Paying Commission for the Life of the Underlying Customer Relationship
- A Win for Out-of-Network Providers
- Mastering Legal Writing: Elevate Your Written Advocacy – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast