On Monday, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) scored a considerable victory at the hands of the Supreme Court in his challenge to a Federal Elections Commission (FEC) law regarding the limit of how much money can be raised after a political campaign to pay back loans.
According to Fox News, in a 6–3 decision, the high court ruled that the FEC’s rules prohibiting the amount of money raised after a campaign to repay loans was unconstitutional.
Fox News noted: “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.”
The Texas Republican had noted on several occasions that he believes such laws were unfair, and prevented newcomers and challengers from mounting more impactful campaigns against established, wealthy incumbents.
This Supreme Court decision is a major victory for the First Amendment! pic.twitter.com/uohB9WoZpf
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) May 17, 2022
In the high court’s final opinion on the matter, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “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.”
“[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.” He would go on to note in his decision that the U.S. government lacked a “a legitimate objective” in the repayment cap law.
Justice Elena Kagan, in her dissent, claimed that removing such caps opened up a greater possibility for corruption, writing, “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.”
Cruz, in his impressive legal resume, had argued in front of the Supreme Court an astonishing nine times during his career.