Republicans bring TV ad rate war to Supreme Court

The high court was asked to take emergency action in a partisan fight over campaign spending on TV ads set off by the justices’ own ruling.WASHINGTON (CN) — Republicans asked the Supreme Court on Monday for help securing low-cost rates for television advertisements ahead of the midterm elections.The National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee filed an emergency application asking the justices to block an appeals court ruling that only candidates are entitled to such rates.“Every day its judgment remains in effect means fewer voters they can reach,” the committees wrote. “And those lost opportunities to speak to voters before election day cannot be recovered after the election. Denying lowest unit charge rates to certain political actors ‘risks smothering political speech severely.’”The lowest unit charge requirements allow legally qualified candidates to purchase campaign advertising on broadcast television and radio networks at cheaper rates than outside groups. In March, the Federal Communications Commission’s media bureau issued a public notice stating that political party committees and joint fundraising committees also qualified for the discount.Democratic candidates in battleground states including Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff, former Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown and former North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper challenged the new policy guidance. Last week, the Fourth Circuit shot down the public notice and determined election ad discounts are just for candidates.While the spending rules apply equally to both parties, the March guidance could have advantaged Republicans, whose party committees tend to raise more money than individual candidates. The inverse is true for Democrats, whose candidates typically raise more funds.Just two months ago, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority struck down restrictions on campaign spending between political parties and candidates in a separate case brought by Republicans. Democrats celebrated the appeals court’s ruling as a blow to the advantage Republicans gained from the high court’s decision.But Republicans say the Fourth Circuit violated the Supreme Court’s decision by enforcing indirect coordinated-expenditure limits between candidates and parties.“Restricting that political coordination ‘abridges political parties’ freedom of speech,’” Republicans wrote. “So laws that inhibit political-party coordination, such as political-party coordinated-expenditure limits,’ ‘violate the First Amendment.’ The Fourth Circuit’s order inhibits political-party coordination by interpreting the Communications Act in a manner that ‘favors some …modes of candidate speech while disfavoring others.’”Republicans claim the appeals court also violated an even more recent Supreme Court decision on agency finality. Last week, the justices issued a shadow docket rulingon President Donald Trump’s mail-in voting executive order. The high court ruled against a Democrat-led challenge, finding the states could not challenge the order until government agencies took action to enforce its policies.Republicans say the same logic applies to the public notice, which imposes no legal requirements and is dependent on future events that may not occur as anticipated.“The media bureau’s public notice is at most an interpretive guidance document restating the FCC’s longstanding position regarding lowest unit charge rates. Those sorts of ‘interpretive rules … do not have the force and effect of law,” the groups wrote. “So they don’t qualify for judicial review.”If allowed to remain in effect, Republicans claim the Fourth Circuit’s ruling will impact how tens of millions of dollars are spent in this year’s midterm elections. The committees urged the Supreme Court to act before Friday, when the period for the lowest unit charge requirements begin.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads