---
title: Campaign Finance Regulation
description: An overview of the legal framework governing campaign finance in the United States.
keywords: [campaign finance, elections, political speech, disclosure, contribution limits]
category: law
---

## Introduction to Campaign Finance Regulation

The regulation of campaign finance in the United States is a complex and contentious area of law, balancing the fundamental First Amendment right to political speech with the government's interest in preserving the integrity of the electoral process. At the federal level, the primary statutory framework is the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), which imposes limits on the amount and sources of political contributions, as well as disclosure requirements for campaign spending. [*Buckley v. Valeo*, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)]. Additionally, the Supreme Court has issued a series of landmark decisions interpreting the scope of permissible campaign finance regulation. [*Citizens United v. FEC*, 558 U.S. 310 (2010); *McCutcheon v. FEC*, 572 U.S. 185 (2014)].

## Contribution Limits and Source Restrictions

FECA establishes limits on the amount of money that individuals, political action committees (PACs), and other entities can contribute to federal candidates, political parties, and political committees. [52 U.S.C. § 30116(a)]. These limits are adjusted for inflation on a biennial basis. [52 U.S.C. § 30116(c)]. FECA also prohibits certain sources of political contributions, such as foreign nationals, federal contractors, and corporations and labor unions using general treasury funds. [52 U.S.C. § 30118].

The Supreme Court has upheld contribution limits as a permissible means of preventing corruption or the appearance of corruption, but has struck down limits on independent expenditures as violating the First Amendment's protection of political speech. [*Buckley*, 424 U.S. at 23-59]. In *Citizens United*, the Court ruled that the government cannot restrict independent expenditures by corporations, labor unions, and other non-profit organizations. [*Citizens United*, 558 U.S. at 365].

## Disclosure Requirements

FECA imposes extensive disclosure requirements on political contributions and expenditures. Candidates, political committees, and other entities must file periodic reports with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) detailing their receipts and disbursements. [52 U.S.C. § 30104]. These reports must identify the source and amount of all contributions exceeding $200, as well as the recipient and purpose of all expenditures. [52 U.S.C. § 30104(b)].

The Supreme Court has upheld disclosure requirements as a means of informing the electorate and deterring corruption, even in the context of independent expenditures. [*Buckley*, 424 U.S. at 64-68; *Citizens United*, 558 U.S. at 366-71]. However, the Court has recognized that disclosure can burden the exercise of First Amendment rights, and has allowed as-applied challenges to disclosure requirements in certain circumstances. [*NAACP v. Alabama*, 357 U.S. 449 (1958); *McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n*, 514 U.S. 334 (1995)].

## Coordination and Independent Expenditures

A key distinction in campaign finance law is between "coordinated" and "independent" expenditures. Coordinated expenditures, which are made in cooperation or consultation with a candidate or political party, are subject to the same contribution limits as direct contributions. [52 U.S.C. § 30116(a)(7)(B)]. In contrast, independent expenditures, which are made without any coordination with a candidate or party, are not subject to contribution limits but must be disclosed. [*Buckley*, 424 U.S. at 47].

The FEC has promulgated regulations defining the scope of "coordination" for the purposes of campaign finance law. [11 C.F.R. § 109.20]. These regulations have been the subject of ongoing litigation, as groups seek to push the boundaries of permissible independent expenditures. [*Shays v. FEC*, 414 F.3d 76 (D.C. Cir. 2005); *Van Hollen v. FEC*, 811 F.3d 486 (D.C. Cir. 2016)].

## Enforcement and Remedies

FECA is enforced by the FEC, which has the authority to investigate alleged violations and impose civil penalties. [52 U.S.C. § 30109]. The FEC can also refer cases to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution. [52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(5)]. Individuals and organizations found to have violated FECA may be subject to fines, disgorgement of unlawful contributions, and other equitable remedies. [*FEC v. Nat'l Republican Senatorial Comm.*, 966 F.2d 1471 (D.C. Cir. 1992)].

In addition to FEC enforcement, FECA also provides a private right of action for "any person who believes a violation of [FECA] has occurred." [52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(1)]. This allows individuals and organizations to bring civil suits to enforce FECA's provisions. The availability of this private right of action has been the subject of some debate and litigation. [*FEC v. Akins*, 524 U.S. 11 (1998); *FEC v. Colo. Republican Fed. Campaign Comm.*, 533 U.S. 431 (2001)].

## Conclusion

The regulation of campaign finance in the United States is a complex and evolving area of law, shaped by a delicate balance between the First Amendment's protection of political speech and the government's interest in preserving the integrity of the electoral process. While FECA and related jurisprudence have established a framework of contribution limits, disclosure requirements, and enforcement mechanisms, the boundaries of permissible campaign finance regulation continue to be tested and debated in the courts. As the role of money in politics remains a topic of intense public discourse, the legal landscape surrounding campaign finance is likely to remain a dynamic and heavily litigated field.