Supreme Court strikes down ‘Millionaire’s Amendment’

The Supreme Court struck down a key component of campaign finance reform on Thursday, the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment.”

In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled the amendment violates the First Amendment to the Constitution.

{mosads}Under the Millionaire’s Amendment, candidates were allowed to receive larger contributions from donors when wealthy opponents dipped into their personal fortunes.

The Millionaire's Amendment was part of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, whose chief sponsors were Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wis.).

Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito noted: “We have never upheld the constitutionality of a law that imposes different contribution limits for candidates who are competing against each other.”

His opinion also notes the amendment “requires a candidate to choose between the First Amendment right to engage in unfettered political speech and subjection to discriminatory fundraising limitations.” The candidates who choose to use their own funds to support their campaigns “shoulder a special and potentially significant burden if they make that choice.”

Alito was joined in the decision by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter and Clarence Thomas.

Jack Davis, a former Democratic congressional candidate who lost to Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.) in the 2006 midterm elections, brought the challenge. Davis poured a large amount of his own money into his campaign against Reynolds. Davis is running for the seat again this cycle. Reynolds is retiring.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was a beneficiary of the Millionaire’s Amendment in his 2004 Illinois Senate race.

Aaron Blake and Ian Swanson contributed to this story.