Are Maine’s Restrictions on Independent Expenditure Groups Constitutional? (Dinner Table Action, et al. v. Schneider, et al.)

Episode 52: Dinner Table Action, et al. v. Schneider, et al.Dinner Table Action, et al. v. Schneider, et al. argued before Judges Lara E. Montecalvo, O. Rogeriee Thompson, and Seth R. Aframe of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on July 29, 2026. Argued by Charles “Chip” Miller (on behalf of Dinner Table Action) and Neal Katyal (on behalf of Equal Citizens) and Jonathan Bolton (on behalf of the State of Maine). Case Summary, from the Institute for Free Speech case page: A federal lawsuit seeks to stop a 2024 ballot initiative from placing limits on Mainers’ free speech rights. The suit challenges Maine’s newly enacted restrictions on contributions to independent expenditure groups, sometimes called “Super PACs.” The lawsuit also challenges requirements that force the disclosure of all donors who contribute toward independent expenditures, regardless of amount. Question 1, passed by voters in 2024, imposes a $5,000 limit on contributions to such groups. The measure, also known as the “Act to Limit Contributions to Political Action Committees That Make Independent Expenditures,” contradicts established U.S. Supreme Court precedent, as well as numerous subsequent decisions by multiple federal courts of appeal. Thirty federal appellate judges have considered such limits, and all reached the same conclusion: contribution limits cannot be applied to independent expenditure groups. Meanwhile, the law’s broad disclosure requirement threatens to chill the speech and damage the associational rights of donors who wish to maintain their privacy when participating in the political process. Under current law, donors contributing less than $50 to candidates or political committees can do so without public disclosure of their identity. The new law would force disclosure of all contributors to independent expenditures, regardless of amount, a change that multiple donors have specifically told the plaintiffs would stop them from participating in the political process. Statement of Issues, from Plaintiffs-Appellees’ Response Brief: Whether the First Amendment bars Maine from infringing political speech rights by limiting independent donations for independent expenditures. Whether Maine can require disclosure of small dollar donors who donate towards independent expenditures. Resources: Institute for Free Speech case page (includes all filings) Opening Brief for Defendants-Appellants Equal Citizens, Cara Mccormick, Peter Mccormick, Richard A. Bennett Plaintiffs-Appellees’ Response Brief Reply Brief for Defendants-Appellants Equal Citizens, Cara Mccormick, Peter Mccormick, Richard A. Bennett District Court Order The Institute for Free Speech promotes and defends the political speech rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government guaranteed by the First Amendment. If you’re enjoying the Free Speech Arguments podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on your preferred podcast platform. To support the Institute’s mission or inquire about legal assistance, please visit our website: www.ifs.org