Portland, ME — A new federal lawsuit seeks to stop a 2024 ballot initiative from placing blatantly unconstitutional limits on Mainers’ free speech rights.
Attorneys from the Institute for Free Speech and local counsel Joshua D. Dunlap of Pierce Atwood LLP filed a federal lawsuit today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine on behalf of Dinner Table Action and For Our Future, two Maine political action committees (PACs), and Alex Titcomb, who leads both PACs.
The suit challenges Maine’s newly enacted restrictions on contributions to independent expenditure groups, sometimes called “Super PACs.” The lawsuit also challenges unconstitutional requirements that force the disclosure of all donors who contribute toward independent expenditures, regardless of amount.
Question 1, passed by voters last month, imposes a $5,000 limit on contributions to such groups. The measure—also known as the “Act to Limit Contributions to Political Action Committees That Make Independent Expenditures”—directly contradicts established U.S. Supreme Court precedent, as well as numerous subsequent decisions by multiple federal courts of appeal.
Thirty federal appellate judges have considered such limits, and all 30 reached the same conclusion: contribution limits cannot be applied to independent expenditure groups.
Meanwhile, the law’s broad disclosure requirement threatens to chill the speech and damage the associational rights of donors who wish to maintain their privacy when participating in the political process. Under current law, donors contributing less than $50 to candidates or political committees can do so without public disclosure of their identity. The new law would force disclosure of all contributors to independent expenditures, regardless of amount, a change that multiple donors have specifically told the plaintiffs would stop them from participating in the political process.
Such restrictions would have severe consequences for Mainers who wish to organize and exercise their political speech rights. Dinner Table Action, which raised nearly $490,000 during the 2022 election cycle and over $454,000 in 2024, would face major new hurdles. More than one-third of its donations come from individuals or entities that contribute more than $5,000 annually.
For Our Future, which donated over $230,000 to various Maine PACs in 2024, including $100,000 to Dinner Table Action, would be effectively prevented from continuing its mission of supporting conservative causes and candidates. Since For Our Future has been exclusively funded by contributions over $5,000, the law would effectively shut down its operations entirely, eliminating both its direct advocacy and its support of other citizen groups.
The new restrictions would take immediate effect once the law becomes active later this month, impacting not only future contributions but also preventing groups like these from spending money already raised. These limitations would affect planned spending in upcoming local elections in 2025.
“This unconstitutional law would drastically reduce our ability to speak about candidates and issues that matter to Mainers,” explained Alex Titcomb, Executive Director of Dinner Table Action. “The government cannot restrict independent political speech simply because some voters wish to limit the voices of their fellow citizens.”
The suit also challenges the law’s unequal treatment of PACs and party committees. While independent expenditure PACs would face strict contribution limits, party committees could continue to raise unlimited funds for the same purpose. This means that a law that limits contributions to a citizens’ PAC to just $5,000 would simultaneously allow party bosses to collect and spend unlimited amounts on independent expenditures.
“This law is a direct attack on Mainers’ fundamental constitutional rights,” noted Charles “Chip” Miller, Senior Attorney at the Institute for Free Speech. “Not only does it violate their First Amendment right to organize and pool their resources for political speech, but it also violates equal protection by treating citizen groups differently from party committees. A ballot measure cannot override these core constitutional protections.”
The suit seeks to block the law before it takes effect on December 25th, which is 30 days after the governor certified the election results.
To read the full complaint in the lawsuit, Dinner Table Action, et al. v. Schneider, et al., click here. Photos of our client are available on our case page here.
About the Institute for Free Speech
The Institute for Free Speech promotes and defends the political speech rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government guaranteed by the First Amendment.
