McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12-536 | D.D.C | Oct 8, 2013 | Apr 2, 2014 | 5-4 | Roberts | OT 2013 |
Holding: Because aggregate limits restricting how much money a donor may contribute to candidates for federal office, political parties, and political action committees do not further the government"s interest in preventing quid pro quo corruption or the appearance of such corruption, while at the same time seriously restricting participation in the democratic process, they are invalid under the First Amendment.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on April 2, 2014. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion in which Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor and Justice Kagan joined.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Senate Judiciary Committee holds hearing on proposed campaign finance amendment (Amy Howe, June 4, 2014)
- Legal scholarship highlight: How should the Court assess the workings of the other institutions of government? (Richard Pildes, May 20, 2014)
- Justice Stevens goes to the Senate (Amy Howe, May 1, 2014)
- Symposium: McCutcheon and the future of campaign finance regulation (Jan Baran, April 4, 2014)
- Symposium: The Supreme Court and the McCutcheon decision (Fred Wertheimer, April 4, 2014)
- Symposium: McCutcheon opens the door to massive party contributions, but four Justices continue to push back forcefully (Paul Smith, April 3, 2014)
- Symposium: Welcome to Oligarchs United (Burt Neuborne, April 3, 2014)
- Symposium: The First Amendment's protection of political speech extends to both donations and spending (Ilya Shapiro, April 3, 2014)
- Symposium: Does the Chief Justice not understand politics, or does he understand it all too well? (Richard Hasen, April 3, 2014)
- Foreword: It's all forward now (Ronald Collins and David Skover, April 3, 2014)
- Divided Court strikes down campaign contribution caps: In Plain English (Amy Howe, April 3, 2014)
- A civil day on the bench for opinions on the impolite world of campaign finance (Mark Walsh, April 2, 2014)
- Opinion analysis: Freeing more political money (Lyle Denniston, April 2, 2014)
- The ACLU & the McCutcheon case (Ronald Collins, March 14, 2014)
- Book excerpt: Before McCutcheon – The ACLU position in the early years (Ronald Collins, March 12, 2014)
- The Chief Justice looks for a compromise on contribution caps? This morning's argument in Plain English (Amy Howe, October 9, 2013)
- Argument recap: How is political influence bought? (Lyle Denniston, October 8, 2013)
- Court returns to campaign finance reform: Tomorrow's oral argument in Plain English (Amy Howe, October 8, 2013)
- Argument preview: Campaign finance -- again (Lyle Denniston, October 5, 2013)
- Symposium: Voters and contributors (Tamara Piety, August 19, 2013)
- Symposium: Aggregate limits and the fight over frame (Justin Levitt, August 16, 2013)
- Symposium: McCutcheon v. FEC and the fork in the road (Joel Gora, August 15, 2013)
- Originalism: It's not just for conservatives anymore (Adam Winkler, August 14, 2013)
- Burning the house to roast the pig: Can elections be saved by banning political speech? (Bob Corn-Revere, August 13, 2013)
- Symposium: The distinction between contribution limits and expenditure limits (Erwin Chemerinsky, August 12, 2013)
- Symposium: McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (Ronald Collins and David Skover, August 12, 2013)
- Symposium announcement (Ronald Collins, August 9, 2013)
- GOP seeks more donor freedom (Lyle Denniston, May 8, 2013)
- Campaign donation issue reopened (Lyle Denniston, February 19, 2013)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| 10/26/2012 | Statement as to jurisdiction filed. (Response due December 3, 2012) |
| 11/14/2012 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including January 2, 2013. |
| 01/02/2013 | Motion to dismiss or affirm filed by appellee Federal Election Commission. |
| 01/14/2013 | Opposition to motion to dismiss or affirm of appellants Shaun McCutcheon, et al., Appellants filed. (Distributed) |
| 01/16/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 15, 2013. |
| 02/19/2013 | PROBABLE JURISDICTION NOTED. |
| 03/01/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from the Solicitor General. |
| 03/07/2013 | The time to file the joint appendix and appellants' brief on the merits is extended to and including May 6, 2013. |
| 03/11/2013 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by appellants Shaun McCutcheon, et al., Appellants. |
| 04/01/2013 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED. |
| 04/22/2013 | The time to file appellee's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 18, 2013. |
| 05/06/2013 | Brief of appellant Republican National Committee filed. |
| 05/06/2013 | Brief of appellant Shaun McCutcheon |
| 05/08/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Rights Union filed. |
| 05/10/2013 | Brief amici curiae of National Republican Senatorial Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Downsize DC Foundation, et al. filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Senator Mitch McConnell filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Center for Competitive Politics filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Committee for Justice filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Justice filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Tea Party Leadership Fund, et al. filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Cause of Action Institute filed. |
| 05/13/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression and the Media Institute filed. |
| 07/18/2013 | Brief of appellee Federal Election Commission filed. |
| 07/22/2013 | CIRCULATED. |
| 07/23/2013 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, October 8, 2013. |
| 07/24/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Brennan Center for Justice at N.Y.U. School of Law filed. (Distributed) |
| 07/24/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Americans for Campaign Reform filed. (Distributed) |
| 07/25/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Representatives Chris Van Hollen and David Price filed. (Distributed) |
| 07/25/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Professor Lawrence Lessig filed. (Distributed) |
| 07/25/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Democratic Members of the United States House of Representatives filed. (Distributed) |
| 07/25/2013 | Brief amici curiae of The Campaign Legal Center, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| 07/25/2013 | Motion of Senator Mitch McConnell for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. |
| 07/25/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Communications Workers of America, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| 07/25/2013 | Brief amici curiae of National Education Association, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| 08/05/2013 | Record from U.S.D.C. for the District of Columbia is electronic and located on PACER. |
| 08/16/2013 | Reply of appellant Republican National Committee filed. (Distributed) |
| 08/19/2013 | Reply of appellant Shaun McCutcheon filed. (Distributed) |
| 08/30/2013 | Motion of Senator Mitch McConnell for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. |
| 10/08/2013 | Argued. For appellants: Erin E. Murphy, Washington, D. C.; and Bobby R. Burchfield, Washington, D. C. (for Senator Mitch McConnell, as amicus curiae.) For appellee: Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. |
| 04/02/2014 | Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which Scalia, Kennedy, and Alito, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. |
| 05/05/2014 | JUDGMENT ISSUED |
Issue: (1) Whether the biennial limit on contributions to non-candidate committees, 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(3)(B), is unconstitutional for lacking a constitutionally cognizable interest as applied to contributions to national party committees; and (2) Whether the biennial limits on contributions to non-candidate committees, 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(3)(B), are unconstitutional facially for lacking a constitutionally cognizable interest; and (3) Whether the biennial limits on contributions to non-candidate committees are unconstitutionally too low, as applied and facially; and (4) Whether the biennial limit on contributions to candidate committees, 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(3)(A), is unconstitutional for lacking a constitutionally cognizable interest.