NPR : News

Filed Under:

Supreme Court Will Not Hear Campaign Finance Case On Corporate Donations

The Supreme Court says it won't hear a case that would have let candidates solicit money from corporations. By doing so, the court is reaffirming one strict ban on corporate political money, three years ago after easing other limits in its controversial Citizens United ruling.

Congress outlawed corporate contributions to candidates back in 1907. Now, two businessmen say that Citizens United makes that law unconstitutional – and they claim a First Amendment right to give corporate funds directly to candidates.

The Justice Department is prosecuting investment bankers William Danielczyk and Eugene Biagi for allegedly funneling corporate money into the old Senate and presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton. Prosecutors say the two reimbursed employees for contributions that arrived at the campaigns as small, personal — and legal — donations.

Danielczyk and Biagi challenged the corporate donation ban before the trial began. Monday, the Supreme Court rejected their petition without explanation.

But this refusal is something of an anomaly. Federal courts have dramatically loosened the rules in recent years, most notably with two cases in 2010:

  • In Citizens United, the Supreme Court said that corporations can spend freely to support or attack candidates, and that independent spending cannot be considered a factor of corruption to the candidates who benefit from it.
  • A few weeks after that, a Washington, D.C., appellate court ruled in a case known as SpeechNow that wealthy donors can join together to raise and spend unlimited amounts on independent ads – essentially, the description of a Super PAC.

Last week, the Supreme Court said it will take up a challenge to the overall limit a donor can give during a two-year election cycle. Eliminating that umbrella limit would allow a donor to give the maximum to any and all federal candidates and party committees.

The plaintiff in that case, Shaun McCutcheon of Alabama, along with the Republican National Committee, argues that because the amount of each contribution would still be capped, a guard against corruption would remain in place.

Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit

WAMU 88.5

Anne Tyler: "A Spool Of Blue Thread" (Rebroadcast)

In her first live radio interview ever, Pulitzer Prize winning author Anne Tyler joins Diane to talk about her 20th novel, "A Spool of Blue Thread."


Thanksgiving Buzz: What Would Pilgrims Say About The Plight Of Bees?

When you sit down for your holiday dinner, you may want to give thanks to bees and other pollinators. Their health is tied to your food. What's behind the bee declines? Watch our video investigation.

Reconsidering The Pilgrims, Piety And America's Founding Principles

Conservatives who want to emphasize America's Christian roots embrace the story of the Pilgrims and the Mayflower Compact. But some historians say their role in the country's founding is overstated.

From Takeout To Breakups: Apps Can Deliver Anything, For A Price

Convenience is at an all-time premium — and a lot of smartphone apps promise to make many of the things we do every day easier. In a time-crunch or sheer laziness, how far will the apps take us?

Leave a Comment

Help keep the conversation civil. Please refer to our Terms of Use and Code of Conduct before posting your comments.