A federal judge has blocked Maine's new law capping the amount that individuals or organizations can contribute to so-called super PACs, ruling that the limits violate free speech.
The ballot initiative approved by Maine voters last year would set a $5,000 annual limit on donations to political action committees that make "independent expenditures" on candidate campaigns. Supporters argue that the cap is needed to avoid potential quid-pro-quo corruption — which is when an individual or group makes a donation and gets political favors in return from the elected official who benefited from their supposedly independent spending.
Roughly 75% of voters supported Question 1 on last year's ballot. But two Maine super PACs — For Our Future and Dinner Table Action — teamed up with national group the Institute for Free Speech to challenge the new law in court.
On Tuesday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Karen Frink Wolf declared the restrictions unconstitutional and blocked enforcement of the law.
"The portions of the act limiting contributions to PACs for the purposes of making independent expenditures ... violate the First Amendment on their face because there is no set of circumstances where they could be applied constitutionally," Wolf wrote in her 15-page ruling.
Wolf wrote that the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Citizens United clearly prohibits any limits on contributions to groups that spend money to support or defeat candidates independently from those campaigns. That controversial decision opened the door for corporations and labor unions to spend unlimited sums on elections by protecting such spending as free speech under the First Amendment.
Wolf also blocked enforcement of additional donor disclosure requirements for super PACs.
“Dinner Table Action has hundreds of members who value the right to speak collectively. This injunction protects our, and every Mainer’s, fundamental right to join together and speak about elections,” said Alex Titcomb, executive director of the conservative political group. “I’m thrilled with this outcome, as it makes it clear that the government cannot restrict independent political speech or limit Mainers’ ability to speak about the issues that matter to them.”
The backers of last year's ballot initiative not only expected a legal challenge — they welcomed it. That's because they believe the Supreme Court hasn't addressed this specific issue involving super PACs. And they hope their case will eventually land in front of the high court.
