Appellant Virginia James wishes to contribute to federal candidates and their committees. She does not intend to exceed the $2,500 limit on contributions to particular candidates. But she does prefer to make contributions, in the aggregate, exceeding the $46,200 ceiling the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (“BCRA”) and subsequent FEC regulations impose.
Using the same BCRA procedure by which the Supreme Court heard Citizens United v. FEC, Dickerson and his legal team are arguing that the US District Court committed two major errors in dismissing James’s case: First, it claimed that there is no overall aggregate limit on campaign contributions. As noted in the appeal, “This holding is contrary to the plain language of BCRA, the FEC’s regulations implementing that Act, and the legislative history of BCRA itself.” Second, the court held, “for the first time and without referencing any authority, that contributions directly to candidate committees pose the same risk of circumvention as do much larger contributions to PACs and, especially, party committees.”