Skip to main content

Supreme Court grants Republican emergency appeal on TV ad rates before midterms

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court granted an emergency appeal from Republicans in a dispute over campaign ad prices on Friday, clearing a legal roadblock to political parties getting cheaper TV ad time ahead of the midterm elections.

The justices halted for now a lower-court ruling in favor of Democratic candidates who argued that cheaper broadcast ads should be limited to candidates. One justice publicly dissented from the unsigned order. It’s the latest election-related appeal to come before the high court ahead of the pivotal November contests.

The Trump administration supported the emergency appeal from GOP campaign arms.

The decision comes on the heels of a June Supreme Court ruling that removed limits on parties spending money in coordination with candidates. It was seen as a boon to the GOP because the national party has a sizable cash advantage, and access to cheaper ad rates could boost that edge.

Among Democrats, meanwhile, some individual candidates have sizable fundraising advantages over their Republican opponents.

Candidates pay discounted rates for TV time around an election under federal law, and in March the Federal Communications Commission’s Media Bureau said certain party-coordinated ads are entitled to those prices as well.

Four Democrats, including Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia and former Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, challenged the finding in court. They won a victory from a divided panel of the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of appeals.

The National Republican Congressional Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee then asked the Supreme Court to intervene. They argued that broadcasters were already charging them higher rates and upending their planned budgets after the appeals court decision.

The majority of justices agreed that the lower court had acted too soon with the order that differed from judges around the country.

“Current and future recissions will require the party committees to pay more for advertising space, thereby hampering their efforts to reach the electorate in the critical weeks leading up to the midterms,” the Supreme Court order states.

One justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, disagreed, writing that the court likely didn’t have to wait until an internal FCC review was done.

The decision halts the appeals court ruling while the Republican committees file a fuller appeal.

The Latest: Mistrial declared in Lindsay Clancy child killings case after jury deadlocks

PLYMOUTH, Mass. (AP) — Lindsay Clancy's trial judge declared a mistrial Friday after an emergency defense appeal was denied. Judge William Sullivan ended the trial after jurors on Friday sent a note for a third time saying they couldn't unanimously decide whether to hold her criminally responsible for killing her three young children in 2023. Deliberations took a dramatic turn Thursday when the foreperson told the judge that a lone holdout was refusing to follow the court’s instructions about reasonable doubt. Clancy’s defense has argued that the judge’s refusal to remove the juror undermines the trial. Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse, doesn’t deny strangling her children in the basement of their home. Defense attorney Kevin Reddington blamed postpartum psychosis. Jennifer Sprague said Clancy knew what she was doing. Postpartum psychosis is estimated to afflict 1 to 2 per 1,000 women after delivery. Experts at the Cleveland Clinic describe it as a mental health emergency affecting someone’s sense of reality. Though most people with postpartum psychosis don’t harm their children, mothers with severe cases may try to do so.
Read Next Story