Key Florida campaign-finance provision blocked by federal court

A panel of the Eleventh US Circuit Court of Appeals issued an injunction on a provision of Florida's campaign-finance law aimed at leveling the playing field for candidates, citing free-speech rights.

(Page 2 of 2)

McCollum would still be subject to Florida’s $500 limit on individual and corporate contributions, making it difficult for him to keep pace with an anticipated flood of campaign advertising paid for by Scott from personal funds.

The Millionaire's Amendment

In overturning the federal judge and issuing the temporary injunction, the appeals court cited a 2008 US Supreme Court decision in which the justices struck down the so-called Millionaire’s Amendment in the federal campaign finance law.

Congress had sought to level the playing field between self-funded candidates and those who agreed to abide by campaign finance restrictions. Under the law, a wealthy self-financed candidate would continue to be subject to the standard contribution limit of $2,300. In contrast, opponents of “millionaire” candidates would have their contribution limit tripled to $6,900 per individual, making it significantly easier for them to raise money.

In that case, Davis v. Federal Election Commission, the court ruled 5 to 4 that the campaign finance law created an unprecedented penalty that violated the First Amendment’s protection of political speech – including self-funded political speech.

The Eleventh Circuit panel said they were applying that decision to Florida’s excess spending subsidy.

“We conclude that the burden that an excess spending subsidy imposes on nonparticipating candidates is harsher than the penalty in Davis,” Pryor wrote.

"None of this is to say that the public financing system of Florida does not benefit the people of Florida or that public financing generally is not a system worthy of public resources,” he wrote. “It is only to say that Florida … cannot impose a special and potentially significant burden on the First Amendment rights of nonparticipating candidates who do not wish, for whatever reason, to accept public money.”

Related: