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
- AI Medical Technology Meets IP Law in Patent Infringement Suit
- DOJ Civil Division Announces Accelerated Review of FCA Whistleblower Complaints Involving Federally Funded, State-Administered Benefits Programs
- Washington Amends CEMA: Plaintiffs Rush to File Actions Before June 11, 2026 Effective Date
- Five Cases Health Care and Life Sciences GCs Should Keep Watching in 2026
- Protecting Purchased Goodwill: Sale-of-Business Restrictive Covenants Under National Scrutiny