Newberry v. United States
Newberry v. United States is a significant Supreme Court case from 1921 that addressed the regulation of campaign finance, particularly in relation to primary elections. The case arose when Truman Handy Newberry, a Republican candidate for the Senate, was convicted for exceeding spending limits set by the Federal Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that while Congress has the authority to regulate general elections, it does not have the power to impose limits on the party nomination process, which includes primaries. This decision marked an important moment in the legal landscape of campaign finance, signaling a setback for federal efforts to control the influence of money in elections. The case highlighted the complexities of campaign finance regulation during the early 20th century, as wealthy individuals like Henry Ford leveraged these regulations for political purposes. Although Newberry initially won his seat following the ruling, he resigned amid political pressures in 1922. The outcome of this case contributed to ongoing debates about the role of money in politics and set the stage for future amendments to campaign finance laws.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Newberry v. United States
The Case: U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of federal campaign finance regulations affecting primary and general elections
Date: Decided on May 2, 1921
In Newberry v. United States, the Supreme Court struck down part of a law enacted by Congress limiting the amount candidates could spend on primary and general election campaigns for Congress. In particular, the court ruled that the federal government can only regulate general elections, not the party nomination process of which primaries are a part.
During the 1920s, the Supreme Court shaped the authority of Congress by declaring many of its laws unconstitutional. In the case of Newberry v. United States, the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) of 1910. While the original law limited campaign spending on general elections, a 1911 amendment extended these limits to primary elections as well, stipulating that no candidate could spend more than $5,000 total on a campaign for the House of Representatives, more than $10,000 on a campaign for the Senate, or more than any provisions in state law, whichever was less.
The state of Michigan passed a law in 1913 limiting federal campaign spending to a percentage of the salary of the office the candidate was seeking. In 1918, during his campaign for the Senate, Truman Handy Newberry was therefore limited to spending $3,750 toward the Republican Party nomination, and the same amount on the general election. He won the nomination, and went on to win the general election, but spent on the order of $100,000 in the process. Newberry was investigated for violating federal campaign finance law, tried, and convicted in 1921. He appealed his conviction, contending parts of the FCPA was unconstitutional.
By a vote of five to four, the Supreme Court agreed with Newberry, reversing his conviction and striking down the 1911 amendment to the FCPA. The Court stated that while Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution grants Congress the power to regulate congressional elections, that power did not extend to primary elections, which are not elections to Congress but part of the party nomination process.
Impact
Newberry v. United States was an early setback to federal efforts to control the role of money in U.S. elections. Ironically, the man who led the charge against Newberry was famed industrialist Henry Ford, whom Newberry had beaten in the Senate election. Himself one of the country’s wealthiest men and no stranger to exercising the power of money, Ford was nonetheless happy to draw on campaign finance law and progressive sentiments to attack his opponent. Following the Supreme Court decision, the Senate conducted its own contentious investigation, eventually finding Newberry entitled to his seat. However, in the face of ongoing political headwinds, Newberry resigned in 1922. In 1925, the FCPA was amended again to correct some of its defects, establishing, among other provisions, the practice of quarterly campaign finance reports.
Bibliography
Corrado, Anthony, et al., eds. Campaign Finance Reform: A Sourcebook. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1997.
Ervin, Spencer. Henry Ford vs. Truman H. Newberry: The Famous Senate Election Contest. Reprint. New York: Arno Press, 1974.