23
Supreme Court Lifts Spending Limits on Political Parties and Candidates
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2026
23 points (100.0% liked)
New York Times gift articles
1677 readers
42 users here now
Share your New York Times gift articles links here.
Rules:
- Only post New York Times gift article links.
Info:
- The NYT Open Team. (2021-06-23). “A New Way to Share New York Times Stories”. open.nytimes.com.
- “Gift Articles for New York Times Subscribers”. (n.d.). help.nytimes.com.
Tip:
- Google "unlocked_article_code" and limit search results to the past week.
- Mastodon: Use control-F or ⌘-F to search this page. (ref)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Not sure I understand, but isn't it pretty much the case with super PACs already? The article only mentions the difference in advertising rates.
Yes and no. Yes it is the case the those PACs can spend basically infinite money, but the "problem" for them is the actual candidate gets a discount when buying ads and they weren't "allowed" to coordinate with the candidate.
So what was basically happening is that Republicans were kind of losing the money war at times because their PACs were having to pay more per ad while the Democrats which more and more of their money was being made up by small dollar donations were able to just keep buying discounted ads.
So this decision says to those PACs that now they can just give unlimited money to the candidate and the candidate can buy the discounted ads. Because idk making the PAC pay more was restricting their freedom of speech or some such bullshit.