A Synopsis of the Supreme Court's decision in Davis v. Federal Election Commission, 554 U.S. 724 (2008)
Keywords:
Davis v. Federal Election Commission; Campaign Finance; First Amendment; Political Speech; Candidate Self-FinancingAbstract
The article looks at the Supreme Court's ruling in Davis v. Federal Election Commission, 554 U.S. 724 (2008), with regard to the constitutionality of the "Millionaires' Amendment" to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. The Court determined that the provision placed an unconstitutional burden on the First Amendment rights of candidates who financed their campaigns out of substantial personal funds. The paper then examines the Court's use of Buckley v. Valeo, its rejection of the idea that financial equality among candidates constitutes a sufficient governmental interest, and the wider implications of the decision for the regulation of campaign finance. It concludes that the Davis decision enhanced the constitutional protection of political speech and candidate self-financing while at the same time restricting Congress's power to regulate campaign finance in order to equalize electoral resources.
References
1. Brennan Center for Justice (2008). Davis v. Federal Election Commission.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/court-cases/davis-v-federal-election-commission
2. Burke, T. F. (2019). The Concept of Corruption in Campaign Finance. Constitutional Commentary, 14(1), 127.
3. EveryCRSreport (2010). Campaign Finance Law and the Constitutionality of the "Millionaire's Amendment": An Analysis of Davis v. Federal Election Commission.
https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RS22920.html
4. FEC (2008). Davis v. FEC. https://www.fec.gov/legal-resources/court-cases/davis-v-fec
5. Fevurly, G. (2010). Davis v. Federal Election Commission: A Further Step Towards Campaign Finance Deregulation And The Preservation Of The Millionaires' Club. University of Colorado Law Review, 81(2).https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1565&context=lawreview
6. Gedge, S. (2009). "Wholly Foreign to the First Amendment": The Demise of Campaign Finance's Equalizing Rationale in Davis v. Federal Election Commission, 128 S.Ct 2759 (2008). Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 32(3), 1197-1209.
7. Justia. (2008). Davis v. Federal Election Commission.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/724/
8. Justia. (2003). McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/540/93/
9. Justia. (1969). Tinker v. Des Moines. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/393/503/
10. Landa, W.C. (2008). Davis v. Federal Election Commission: Constitutional Rights to Ensure Campaign Finance Advantage. Richmond Public Interest Law Review, 12(1).
11. Oyez. (2003). McConnell v. Federal Election Commission. https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/02-1674
12. Oyez. (2007). Davis v. Federal Election Commission. https://www.oyez.org/cases/2007/07-320
13. Persily, N. & Rosenburg, J.S. (2009). Defacing Democracy? The Changing Nature and Rising Importance of As-Applied Challenges In The Supreme Court's Recent Election Law Decisions. Minnesota Law Review, 93(5), 1644–1679.
14. U.S. Const. amend. I.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Auhor(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Studies (JAMS) are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), unless otherwise stated. Authors retain copyright of their work and grant JAMS the right of first publication.
