Former Senator Russ Feingold and Law Forward filing amicus brief warning U.S. Supreme Court against dismantling campaign finance protections

MADISON, Wis. – Former U.S. Senator Russ Feingold and Law Forward are filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court today urging the justices to reject the latest challenge to campaign finance regulations in National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. Federal Election Commission (FEC), a case which could dismantle federal contributions limits, similar to changes that have fueled unprecedented spending in Wisconsin elections.

The case was initiated in 2022 when the NRSC and two Republican candidates, including then-Sen. J.D. Vance, sued the FEC in Ohio. Petitioners argued in favor of striking down federal limits on coordinated contributions from political parties to candidates. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting en banc, rejected the Petitioners’ argument, and now Petitioners are now asking the U.S. Supreme Court to enact this major change in law.

In the amicus brief which will be filed today, Feingold argues this move would be another step in a systematic, decades-long effort to dismantle campaign finance laws that protect against corruption and preserve democratic representation. In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld these federal limits to prevent individual donors from using committees of the major political parties to circumvent federal limits on contributions. Feingold also spotlights his home state of Wisconsin as an example of the harm that will inexorably follow the ruling Petitioners seek.

“We don’t have to guess what will happen if additional campaign finance rules are torn up, we’ve already witnessed it in Wisconsin. Striking down these federal limits will remove guardrails that are necessary for a representative democracy to thrive,” said former Senator Russ Feingold. “The erosion of regulations is responsible for an alarming increase in the amount of money flowing through elections, giving wealthy donors an outsized voice in the political process, reducing the public’s faith in their elected representatives, and diminishing voters’ willingness to continue participating in the political process.”

The brief uses Wisconsin as a case study, detailing how the state’s elimination of contribution limits to political parties and coordinated spending restrictions since 2015 has led to a flood of money that effectively renders candidate contribution limits meaningless. Recent Wisconsin gubernatorial and Supreme Court elections have shattered fundraising records, with tens of millions of dollars transferred from state parties to candidate committees. Most recently, over $100 million was spent in the 2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court race – making it the most expensive judicial race in American history and eclipsing previous records set by the $10 million spent on Wisconsin’s 2020 state Supreme Court race and the nearly $51 million spent on Wisconsin’s 2023 Supreme Court race.

Feingold’s brief is being filed by Law Forward, a nonprofit nonpartisan pro-democracy law firm that pursues strategic litigation in an effort to strengthen Wisconsin’s democracy.

“Wisconsin’s experience shows exactly what happens when we eliminate these crucial guardrails,” said Rachel Snyder, attorney for Law Forward. “The wealthiest donors route massive contributions through political parties, effectively buying themselves significant access to and influence with both political parties and elected officials. This isn’t about partisan politics—it’s about preserving a democracy where average citizens’ voices aren’t drowned out by billionaires’ checkbooks.”

The brief details how extraordinarily wealthy individuals, including Elon Musk, have exploited Wisconsin’s deregulated campaign finance system to inject unprecedented sums into judicial and other races, fundamentally altering campaign spending in the state.

Feingold, who served in the U.S. Senate from 1993 to 2011 and was the Democratic co-sponsor of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (commonly referred to as McCain-Feingold), argues that the Supreme Court should not be misled by claims that other existing limits provide adequate protection against corruption. The brief warns that if the Court strikes down coordinated spending limits, those other protections will likely be the next target for elimination.

The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. Federal Election Commission during its 2025-26 term.

Read the full brief here.

NOTE: This press release was submitted to Urban Milwaukee and was not written by an Urban Milwaukee writer. While it is believed to be reliable, Urban Milwaukee does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.