Default Article

Political Spending: Civic Engagement is Not a Threat to Democracy

January 1, 2018  •  By IFS Staff  •    •  

The First Amendment guarantees every American freedom of speech. That freedom includes the right to spend money on speech. Without money, a political group cannot buy ads, print fliers, organize protests, or hire staff. Short of shouting one’s opinions on a street corner, it takes money to spread a message. Recognizing this relationship, the Supreme Court has long prohibited the…

Free Speech Arguments – Are Maine’s Restrictions on Independent Expenditure Groups Constitutional? (Dinner Table Action, et al. v. Schneider, et al.)

July 29, 2026   •  By IFS Staff   •  , ,

Dinner Table Action, et al. v. Schneider, et al. argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on July 29, 2026.

Court Cases About Money and Speech in Politics

June 22, 2026   •  By Brad Smith   •  , ,

Maybe the court was wise not to hand government, and self-interested legislators, the power to decide who is speaking too much, and which views ...

Oklahoma ethics rules provide protection from ‘dark money’

May 24, 2026   •  By David Keating   •  , , ,

We don’t need a constitutional amendment that sacrifices essential First Amendment rights for the illusion of greater transparency.

The First Amendment Does Not Contain An Election-Year Exception

May 20, 2026   •  By Brad Smith   •  , ,

The First Amendment does not allow the government to restrict political speech because change might be disruptive.

Letter in Opposition to the Proposed “Campaign Finance Transparency Act”

May 13, 2026   •  By IFS Staff   •  ,

On May 13, 2026, Institute for Free Speech President David Keating wrote a letter to express the organization's strong opposition to the proposed “Campaign ...

Setting the record straight on campaign finance

January 19, 2026   •  By Brad Smith   •  , ,

A response to "How billionaires took over American politics"

Free Speech Arguments – Can Congress Limit Coordination Between a Party and Its Candidates? (National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al.)

December 9, 2025   •  By IFS Staff   •  , , , ,

National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al. argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 9, 2025.

Institute for Free Speech Encouraged by Supreme Court’s Skeptical Reception of Restrictions on Free Political Speech

December 9, 2025   •  By IFS Staff   •  , , ,

Today’s Supreme Court oral argument in NRSC v. FEC ably illustrated that limits on coordinated political party expenditures violate the First Amendment

Free Speech Arguments – Can Congress Limit Coordination Between a Party and Its Candidates? (National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al.)

December 9, 2025   •  By IFS Staff   •  , , ,

National Republican Senatorial Committee, et al. v. Federal Election Commission, et al. argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 9, 2025.

Safe Affordable Georgia, Inc. v. James D. Kreyenbuhl, et al.

December 8, 2025   •  By IFS Staff   •  , , ,

Current Georgia law creates an unfair system by allowing some candidates to raise unlimited funds through "leadership committees" while denying the same opportunity to ...

Load more