A federal appeals court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a case challenging voter-approved limits on contributions to political action groups in Maine.

Supporters of the limits, approved with nearly 75% of the vote in a 2024 referendum, say the case could lead to broader, nationwide limits on spending by so-called super PACs if it proceeds to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case, Dinner Table Action v. Schneider, was brought by two conservative Maine PACs, Dinner Table Action and For Our Future, in December 2024.

They challenged the new law, which put in place a $5,000 limit on contributions to super PACs, which make independent expenditures in races involving candidates. The law would also have forced groups to disclose their donors, including those who donate less than $50. Opponents said that such restrictions are unconstitutional because they limit free speech.

A U.S. District Court judge in Maine agreed in July 2025 that the limits violate the First Amendment, thus preventing the law from being enforced. The state and proponents appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston, arguing that the District Court misapplied the landmark 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United case on campaign finance and free speech.

“This case presents a single question: When the people of Maine decided, by the largest vote in the state’s 206-year history, that unlimited super PAC contributions were corrupting their elections, did the First Amendment leave them powerless? It did not,” Neal Katyal, an attorney for the appellants, told the court Wednesday.

The 2024 referendum was brought forward by a group of campaign finance reform activists including Larry Lessig, a prominent legal scholar and the founder of Equal Citizens, a nonprofit dedicated to election reform. State Sen. Rick Bennett, I-Oxford, a candidate for governor, is also working with supporters of the limits.

Equal Citizens has said it is seeking to overturn a 2010 case out of D.C. Circuit Court, SpeechNow v. FEC, that banned limits on contributions to independent political action committees.

“Should the court accept Equal Citizens’ arguments, DTA v. Schneider will almost certainly proceed on appeal to the Supreme Court, where the justices can end unlimited super PAC contributions not just in Maine, but across the country,” the group said in a written statement Wednesday.

Charles Miller, an attorney for Dinner Table Action, For Our Future and the two groups’ principal officer, Alex Titcomb, argued the Maine District Court decision should be upheld.

“The American people have a First Amendment right to assemble and associate, and to engage in political speech, and particularly election-related speech, free of infringement from any laws,” Miller said. “That is what we’re here talking about today. That’s what individual expenditures are: the association of individuals to get together to speak.”

The court is expected to issue a decision on the case at a later date.