Corporate Accountability

CAC Reacts To Ruling In McCutcheon Campaign Finance Case

Washington, DC – On news this morning that the conservative majority of the U.S. Supreme Court struck down federal aggregate campaign contribution limits in a ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC, Constitutional Accountability Center issued the following reaction: 

 

“In the last two terms the Court has made it easier to spend and harder to vote, with our democracy suffering as a consequence. The Court purports to rely on precedent, mainly Citizens United, but ignores earlier rulings that recognized that large campaign contributions corrupt our system of democracy.  This Supreme Court does not understand corruption, but the Founders did. The Court’s failure to heed the wisdom of its predecessors and our Nation’s Founders leaves America’s campaign finance laws in a shambles of the Court’s own making. The Court suggests that Congress can fix the problems the Court has created, but it surely knows that with the current gridlock in Congress that is exceedingly unlikely.”

 

#

 

Resources:

 

CAC “friend of the court” brief, on behalf of Harvard Professor Lawrence Lessig, in McCutcheon v. FEC: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/CAC-McCutcheon-v-FEC-Amicus-Brief.pdf

 

“Supreme Court Showdown Over Corruption: The Justices Debate McCutcheon v. FEC,” David H. Gans

October 11, 2013: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/2261/supreme-court-showdown-over-corruption-justices-debate-mccutcheon-v-fec

 

“Big Battles Brewing Over the Constitution’s Original Meaning,” Doug Kendall, Tom Donnelly, October 2, 2013: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/2237/big-battles-brewing-over-constitution%E2%80%99s-original-meaning

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

### 

More from Corporate Accountability

Voting Rights and Democracy
December 9, 2025

CAC Release: Major Campaign Finance Case Tests Court’s Willingness to Respect Congress’s Policy Judgments Aimed at Curbing Harmful Corruption

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in National Republican...
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, David H. Gans
Rule of Law
December 8, 2025

CAC Release: Conservative Justices Neglect History at Oral Argument in Monumental Case about Independent Agencies

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Trump v....
By: Brian R. Frazelle, Michelle Berger
Rule of Law
U.S. Supreme Court

Pung v. Isabella County

In Pung v. Isabella County, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment is implicated when a local government seizes real property to satisfy a tax debt and then...
Civil and Human Rights
December 5, 2025

Supreme Court Lets Stand a Two-Tiered System of Justice That Deprives Military Families of the Same Rights Afforded to Civilians

The Rutherford Institute
WASHINGTON, DC — In a ruling that leaves thousands of military servicemembers and their families...
Rule of Law
December 10, 2025

Raises Serious Legal Questions: Wydra on Boat Strike

Bloomberg
Constitutional Accountability Center President Elizabeth Wydra weighs in on the second strike by the United...
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California

Al Otro Lado v. Trump

In Al Otro Lado v. Trump, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California is considering whether the Trump Administration can prohibit certain people from seeking asylum at ports of entry.