Until the early 20th century, the Supreme Court rarely adjudicated in cases concerning the scope of campaign finance laws, as there was no legislation on the issue that would be thought of as controversial. The situation changed when Congress began to regulate money in the federal election process, as the new provisions limited some aspects of the financial participation of various campaign actors. It was a matter of time before these laws would be challenged in the courts, and the first important Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of federal campaign finance legislation was made in 1921, in Newberry v. United States.

In Michigan in 1918 Republican Truman H. Newberry won the U.S. Senate would primary against Henry Ford. According to official data disclosed by his campaign committee, Newberry spent much more money than was permitted by the Federal Corrupt Practices Act. The law provided for spending limits in federal election campaigns according to the regulations set by particular states, whereas funds used during Newberry's campaign exceeded the Michigan-established limits by about 100 times. After the District Court convicted Newberry, he decided to appeal to the Supreme Court, which found the provisions concerning spending limits unconstitutional. In the Court's view, issues regarding primaries and other nomination processes were not elections for office, and were thus beyond the scope of congressional regulation. Such an approach was changed in the early 1940s, when the Court overruled the Newberry holding in United States v. Classic (1941).

MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court…