FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION V. TED CRUZ FOR SENATE, ET AL – THE EXAMINATION OF POST-ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUNDS Written by: Kristian Caruso
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution declares that no law shall prevent the free exercise of or abridge freedom of speech. Restricting political speech is only permissible for “the prevention of ‘quid pro quo’ corruption or its appearance.” In light of this, difficulties arise in weighing the burden on the candidate versus the government’s anticorruption interests.
This Casenote will consider the Supreme Court’s decision handed down in Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate. First, this Casenote begins by establishing the factual setting and the decision of the district court. Second, it will provide a legal history and background of law relevant to the Court’s opinion in Cruz starting with Article III standing, then turning to the remaining issues. Third, the Court’s opinion and reasoning are addressed by considering the arguments. Finally, this Casenote contemplates the effect the decision will have on existing and future law and policy and questions whether it was correctly decided.
