Supreme Court asked to weigh political ad rates

Michael Macagnone, CQ-Roll Call on Oct 8, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to step into a lower court dispute over television advertising rates paid by political candidates and joint fundraising committees weeks before the midterm elections.

The application asked the justices to set aside a 2-1 ruling issued Wednesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, which directed the Federal Communications Commission to resolve by Friday a dispute over the agency’s policy to extend the low advertising rates used by political candidates to party coordinated advertising and joint fundraising committees.

Thursday’s application called the lower court order a “flagrant abuse” of the courts’ authority. The application noted this is the second time the justices have been asked to weigh in on the case, when last month they stepped in to remove the 4th Circuit’s pause of the FCC rules.

The application said the justices should set aside the order because it is “entirely reasonable to refrain from issuing a decision on campaign-finance rules in the middle of the election season.”

The case started in March when the FCC’s Media Bureau issued guidance for the rates political candidates would pay in the 60 days leading up to the primary general elections nationwide. The guidance also extended those guaranteed low rates to party-coordinated advertising and joint fundraising committees for the first time.

Democratic Senate candidates and others challenged that guidance in federal court, seeking to keep the lower rates to candidates only. A separate challenge is still proceeding within an FCC dispute process.

In August the 4th Circuit agreed with the candidates, and found the law likely barred the expansion of guaranteed low ad rates.

The Trump administration asked the justices to step in, and the Supreme Court ruled that the court likely did not have the ability to hear the case while the FCC dispute process was ongoing.

On Wednesday, the 4th Circuit issued an order that accused the agency of “dragging its feet” on the dispute and public comment process in an effort to avoid having judges weigh in on the rates before the election. The order directed the agency to finalize the dispute process by Friday.

Once the FCC process concluded, the 4th Circuit could rule. Thursday’s application asked the justices to pause the 4th Circuit ruling and let the new policy remain in place through the election.

The original August ruling by the 4th Circuit is still paused, keeping the FCC policy in place.

_____