In 2022, then Senate candidate J.D. Vance and other Republicans filed a lawsuit which challenged limits on how much political parties are allowed to spend in coordination with federal candidates.

In a move that is sure to leave Vance thrilled, the Supreme Court announced last week it had agreed to hear the case. 

Lawsuit concerns provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act

As Fox News reported, the case is known as National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, and it concerns the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.

Vance and the other plaintiffs are being represented by the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC).

The NRSC and NRCC maintain that America's highest judicial body should strike down the Federal Election Campaign Act's spending limits as unconstitutional.

According to them, such rules "severely restrict political party committees from doing what the First Amendment entitles them to do: fully associate with and advocate for their own candidates for federal office."

DOJ will not defend law

Meanwhile, CNN pointed out that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has taken the unusual step of not asking the Supreme Court to uphold a federal law.

While the DOJ typically defends legislation which has been passed by Congress, it says this instance represents "the rare case that warrants an exception to that general approach."

Supreme Court agrees to hear a Republican-backed effort to lift caps on campaign spending https://t.co/emzovhs0Iw

— CNN (@CNN) June 30, 2025

"This case involves a campaign-finance restriction that violates core First Amendment rights," the DOJ told the justices in its brief.

While the Supreme Court upheld restrictions on how much parties can spend in conjunctions with candidates over two decades ago, some observers say that probably won't happen again.

Law professor says spending limits are unlikely to survive

Steve Vladeck is a Georgetown University Law Center professor who also serves as CNN's Supreme Court analyst, and he suggested that the law's challengers have a good chance of prevailing.

"We have come to a point at which campaign finance regulations reviewed by the Supreme Court are almost presumptively unconstitutional," Vladeck was quoted as saying.

"It's very difficult to imagine that the justices agreed to take up this case to buck that trend, rather than continue it," the legal scholar went on to add.

Nevertheless, CNN noted that a formal decision is still some time off, with oral arguments not expected to take place until the fall or early next year.