Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-12_m6hn.pdf
Page Number: 13.0

8  FEDERAL ELECTION COMM’N v. TED CRUZ FOR SENATE 

Opinion of the Court 

would have had standing to bring a pre-enforcement chal-
lenge (as they do now) to Section 304 in a much easier man-
ner—by  simply  alleging  and  credibly  demonstrating  that 
Cruz wished to loan his campaign an amount larger than
$250,000,  but  would  not  do  so  only  because  the  loan-
repayment  limitation  made  it  unlikely  that  such  amount 
would be repaid.  See Susan B. Anthony List, 573 U. S., at 
158–159. 
In  addition,  it  ordinarily  would  not  matter 
whether  a  plaintiff  was  challenging  the  statute’s  enforce-
ment or instead the enforcement of a regulation and, in do-
ing so, raising arguments about the validity of the statute 
that  authorized  the  regulation.  Cf.  Collins  v.  Yellen,  594 
U. S. ___, ___–___ (2021) (slip op., at 18–19).  The parties
here, however, assume that the distinction makes a differ-
ence  because  the  subject-matter  jurisdiction  of  the  three-
judge District Court is limited to actions challenging the en-
forcement of the statute.  See BCRA §403(a) (authorizing a
three-judge court to hear any “action . . . brought for declar-
atory or injunctive relief to challenge the constitutionality
of any provision of this Act or any amendment made by this 
Act”).

It seems to us that the Government is likely correct that
appellees have not shown that they exhausted Section 304’s
cap on the use of post-election funds.  The loan-repayment 
limitation applies to contributions “made” after the date of
the election.  52 U. S. C. §30116(j).  And a contribution is 
“considered to be made when the contributor relinquishes
control” over it, which occurs when the contribution is “de-
livered”  to  the  Committee  or  the  candidate.  11  CFR 
§110.1(b)(6).  The redesignated contributions on which ap-
pellees  now  rely,  however,  involve  funds  that  were  deliv-
ered to the Committee before the 2018 election.  And those 
funds  have  remained  under  the  Committee’s  control  from 
that date, even if they were later redesignated to a different
campaign.

But we need not go further down this rabbit hole.  Even