A landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling on campaign finance and corporate political spending
Hawaii has been moving to redefine corporations to preclude spending on elections, with a bill sent to the governor and a Montana-backed ballot effort underway. The Citizens United ruling remains a focal point of debate, while advocates say the reform could curb dark money in politics.
Outside groups have poured billions into 2026 races, with AI, crypto and political power players spending to back or thwart candidates. In NY-12, Maryland’s MD-05, and beyond, pro- and anti-AI committees are influencing races as November approaches, while individual fortunes test the limits of soft money in a polarized landscape.
The Supreme Court has struck down a cap on coordinated party spending in support of candidates, in a 6-3 decision. The ruling upends decades of campaign finance rules, expanding parties’ ability to coordinate with campaigns ahead of the midterms. Republican committees hold a cash advantage over Democrats.
The Supreme Court has ruled that coordinated party spending with campaigns violates the First Amendment, overturning a decades-old cap on party expenditure. The decision is 6-3 in favor of the NRSC, with the majority citing free speech as the justification. The ruling is likely to shift fundraising dynamics ahead of the midterms, as parties can coordinate more with candidates and may attract bigger donations.