Democrats ask Supreme Court to bar GOP from cheaper campaign ad prices

Washington Examiner ^ | 9/3/26 | Jack Birle

[CFW]

A group of Democratic congressional candidates urged the Supreme Court on Thursday to reject an effort by Republican Senate and House campaign committees to halt an appeals court ruling finding coordinated advertisement buys between political parties and joint fundraising committees are not entitled to cheaper candidate rates.

The National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee filed an emergency petition to the Supreme Court earlier this week asking the court to halt the order by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit and restore the cheap ad buy rates for parties and joint fundraising committees. Lawyers for Democratic Senate candidates Sherrod Brown, Jon Ossoff, and Roy Cooper, and Democratic House candidate Kristen McDonald Rivet, argued in a filing Thursday that the high court should reject the emergency petition, leaving in place the 4th Circuit’s ruling.

---

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: advertising; campaigns; elections; scotus

[CFW]

Today SCOTUS granted the Plaintiffs’ Petition.

“For the foregoing reasons, the application for stay presented to THE CHIEF JUSTICE and by him referred to the
Court is granted. The mandate of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in case No. 26–1785 is recalled and stayed pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought.
Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall
terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this
Court. “

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/26a274_l537.pdf

Jackson dissented.

[CFW]

AI overview of the issues.

The Core Issue: The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) are seeking to preserve a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) practice regarding the “lowest unit charge” provision of the Communications Act.

The FCC Policy: The FCC has historically interpreted this provision to allow political committees and joint fundraising committees to secure the same steeply discounted broadcast advertising rates usually reserved exclusively for individual political candidates, provided they buy the airtime in coordination with those candidates.

The Supreme Court Appeal: The NRCC, NRSC, and the FCC (which submitted a supporting brief) have asked the Supreme Court to lift the Fourth Circuit’s order. They argue that the Fourth Circuit lacked the authority to disrupt a long-standing, status-quo pricing structure right in the middle of a critical campaign window.

Today, SCOTUS granted that request.

[TTFX]

I suggest you mention which AI you’re using. That will help us evaluate and keep in mind their bias (in the unlikely case their bias isn’t leftist).

[No.6]

Which is to say the Democrats already get free advertising from the entire MSM and don’t want the truth getting out.

[CFW]

SCOTUS Wire
@scotus_wire
·
46m
🚨 In a likely 8-1 vote, the Supreme Court has restored, for now, an FCC policy that could magnify Republicans’ party-level cash advantage by letting parties and certain joint fundraising committees get discounted broadcast ad rates for ads coordinated with candidates.

SCOTUS Wire
@scotus_wire
·
47m
The Court says the Fourth Circuit likely lacked jurisdiction because the Democratic Senate candidates sued while their challenge to the policy was still pending before the full FCC. Federal law, SCOTUS says, requires the Commission to resolve that challenge first.

[CFW]

“I suggest you mention which AI you’re using. That will help us evaluate and keep in mind their bias (in the unlikely case their bias isn’t leftist).”

---

Good idea.

My overview above was by Google’s Gemini.

[JSM_Liberty]

All candidates should have to pay market rates for their advertising.

[af_vet_1981]

All candidates should have to pay market rates for their advertising.

“They” are not candidates.

[JSM_Liberty]

— “They” are not candidates.

Then “they” shouldn’t be entitled to candidate rates.

[af_vet_1981]

Then “they” shouldn’t be entitled to candidate rates.

The democrats want them to pay candidate rates, but they are entitled to pay committee rates according to established rules. That is the gist of the case.

4th Circuit has Obama appointee as chief judge and 8 to 7 democrat majority