Supreme Court Rejects Vermont’s Campaign Finance Law
This is a complicated issue. We'll let the Washington Post take it: "The Supreme Court struck down Vermont's strict limits on campaign contributions and spending yesterday, in a splintered ruling that left intact the constitutional basis of current campaign finance laws but may make it difficult to put new curbs on money in politics."TRUTHDIG’S JOURNALISM REMAINS CLEARWashington Post:
The Supreme Court struck down Vermont’s strict limits on campaign contributions and spending yesterday, in a splintered ruling that left intact the constitutional basis of current campaign finance laws but may make it difficult to put new curbs on money in politics.
Vermont’s law, approved in 1997, was the toughest in the country with regard to setting limits on the amount individuals and parties may contribute to campaigns and, perhaps more significantly, on how much candidates may spend on their campaigns.
The measure was enacted as a direct challenge to Buckley v. Valeo , the 30-year-old Supreme Court ruling that has generally been read to permit limits on campaign contributions, for the purpose of stopping corruption or apparent corruption — and to bar limits on candidates’ spending as a violation of free speech.
The storytellers of chaos tried to manipulate the political and media narrative in 2025, but independent journalism exposed what they tried to hide. When you read Truthdig, you see through the illusion.
Support Independent Journalism.


You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.