Institute For Free Speech

Contribution Limits: Caps on First Amendment Activity
January 1, 2018  •  By IFS Staff  •    •  

Contribution limits are monetary restrictions on the amount an individual or group can donate to a political actor – usually a candidate, political party, or political action committee. The Supreme Court first allowed limits on contributions in Buckley v. Valeo. The Court’s ruling acknowledged that contribution limits were a restriction on First Amendment activity, but allowed them on the theory…

Assumptions Gone Awry: New Book Casts Further Doubt on “Appearance of Corruption” Legal Standard
July 7, 2021   •  By Alec Greven   •  , , , , , ,

In an insightful new book, The Appearance of Corruption: Testing the Supreme Court’s Assumptions about Campaign Finance Reform, three political scientists examine the Court's ...

Top 4 Money in Politics Takeaways from the 2020 Election Cycle
December 15, 2020   •  By Nathan Maxwell   •  , , , ,

If money suppresses turnout, it’s apparently quite bad at it – even worse if it purports to buy elections. If 2020 has shown us ...

Third Parties Are Excluded from the Presidential Debates – And Punished by Campaign Finance Laws
October 22, 2020   •  By Scott Blackburn   •  , , ,

It’s not just the debates that advantage major party candidates: The entire campaign finance ecosystem has been purposefully crafted to maintain the two-party duopoly. ...

Should Campaign Consultants and Public Opinion Polls Decide Which Political Speech Receives First Amendment Protection?
September 28, 2020   •  By Barnaby Zall   •  , , ,

There’s a new book out by Professors David Primo and Jeffrey Milyo on a fundamental issue in First Amendment law. The authors find that ...

Industry-Based Contribution Bans: Should Your Line of Work Determine Your First Amendment Rights?
September 24, 2020   •  By Heather McGuire   •  , , , ,

A new and creative way to restrict speech has arrived in the form of industry-based contribution bans. These bans typically target an industry and ...

Cancel culture and speech regulation make a toxic mix
September 15, 2020   •  By David Keating   •  , , , ,

This piece originally appeared in the Washington Examiner on September 15, 2020.   What do Steven Pinker, David Frum, Margaret Atwood, and Noam Chomsky have ...

Pledges Against Corporate PACs Do Little but Confuse and Harm
August 26, 2020   •  By Nathan Maxwell   •  , , ,

Candidate pledges denouncing support from select groups tend to utilize public misunderstanding of campaign finance law to generate the facade of moral superiority, trade ...

Multnomah County, et al. v. Mehrwein, et al.
August 17, 2020   •  By Scott Blackburn   •  , , ,

The Measure limits contributions to candidates and to groups making independent expenditures. The Oregon Supreme Court, however, has held that the Oregon constitution can ...

2020 shows money can’t buy elections, so let’s remove restrictive contribution limits
July 14, 2020   •  By Nathan Maxwell   •  , , ,

This piece originally appeared in the Washington Examiner on July 13, 2020.   We should have learned our lesson by now. In elections, it’s not ...

Pandemic Gives Incumbents Yet Another Advantage Over Challengers
May 4, 2020   •  By Tiffany Donnelly   •  , ,

The current public health crisis magnifies the disparity between challengers and incumbents. The entire country is almost singularly focused on the impact of COVID-19, ...

Load more

Get the Latest Updates

© 2024 Institute for Free Speech | 1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW | Suite 801 | Washington, DC 20036 | 202-301-3300

The word mark Institute for Free Speech® and its logo of a stylized lantern with a flame are federally registered service marks and are owned by the Institute for Free Speech.