Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-12_m6hn.pdf
Page Number: 15

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

Opinion of the Court 

Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U. S. 332, 353, n. 5 (2006).  Here, how-
ever, appellees seek to challenge the one Government action 
that causes their harm: the FEC’s threatened enforcement 
of the loan-repayment limitation, through its implementing 
regulation. 
In  doing  so,  they  may  raise  constitutional
claims  against  Section  304,  the  statutory  provision  that, 
through the agency’s regulation, is being enforced.  Cf. Col-
lins, 594 U. S., at ___–___ (slip op., at 18–19).  Even on the 
Government’s  version  of  the  facts,  then,  we  are  satisfied 
that  appellees  have  standing  to  challenge  the  threatened
enforcement of Section 304.  And because they are challeng-
ing  “the  constitutionality  of  [a]  provision  of  [BCRA],”
§403(a), jurisdiction was proper in the three-judge District 
Court.  We thus proceed to the merits. 

III 
A 
The  First  Amendment  “has  its  fullest  and  most  urgent 
application precisely to the conduct of campaigns for politi-
cal office.”  Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy, 401 U. S. 265, 272 
(1971).  It safeguards the ability of a candidate to use per-
sonal funds to finance campaign speech, protecting his free-
dom “to speak without legislative limit on behalf of his own 
candidacy.”  Buckley, 424 U. S., at 54.  This broad protec-
tion,  we  have  explained,  “reflects  our  profound  national 
commitment  to  the  principle  that  debate  on  public  issues
should  be  uninhibited,  robust,  and  wide-open.”  Id.,  at  14 
(internal quotation marks omitted).

The Government seems to agree with appellees that the
loan-repayment  limitation  abridges  First  Amendment
rights, at least to some extent, see Brief for Appellant 27–
32, and we reach the same conclusion.  This provision, by
design and effect, burdens candidates who wish to make ex-
penditures  on  behalf  of  their  own  candidacy  through  per-
sonal loans.  See 52 U. S. C. §30101(9)(A)(i) (defining “ex-
penditure” to include loans); see also Buckley, 424 U. S., at