A new Supreme Court campaign finance ruling has sparked criticism from lawmakers across the political spectrum, with opponents warning it could increase party control, expand billionaire influence and weaken voter representation in U.S. elections.

Massie, Sanders And Others Slam Supreme Court Ruling

On Tuesday, in a post on X, Sen. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said the ruling would shift influence away from voters and toward party leadership.

"The net effect of this decision is political parties will have more power over individual candidates," he wrote.

He added that elected officials would feel greater pressure after winning office, saying they would be "more obligated to vote with their parties instead of their constituents."

Massie also warned about the impact on independent lawmakers, stating, "Fewer Thomas Massies and Ro Khannas, more zombies."

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said the ruling "demolish[ed] some of the last safeguards we had left," arguing it would create "an even bigger role for special interest spending."

He called for campaign finance reforms, "including a constitutional amendment if necessary."

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said, "The Supreme Court today made a corrupt campaign finance system even worse."

"The Court struck down limits on the coordination between candidates and political parties, giving billionaires even more power." He added.

He further said, "Billionaires buying elections is not democracy. It's Oligarchy."

Trump Faces Mixed Supreme Court Rulings

The U.S. Supreme Court issued mixed rulings involving Trump, backing his presidential authority in some areas while rejecting key challenges in others.

On Monday, the Court refused to hear Trump's appeal of a $5 million civil judgment in favor of E. Jean Carroll, leaving in place a jury verdict finding him liable for sexual abuse and defamation.

Trump called the case "fake" and said he would continue fighting it.

In a separate 5–4 decision, the Court blocked Trump's attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, ruling he did not follow required legal procedures and that Fed governors can only be removed "for cause."

The case returns to lower courts for further review.