Federal limits on individual campaign contributions were previously capped at $123,200. That all changed on Wednesday, when the Supreme Court struck down the limit, saying it violates a donor's First Amendment rights.
It is the latest in a string of decisions upending campaign finance reforms that were passed by Congress after the Watergate scandal in the ’70s.
The justices did not change the limits on individual contributions to a particular candidate for Congress or the White House. That remains capped at $2,600 per candidate in the primaries and general election.
Rather, the court threw out the so-called aggregate cap, which means donors can now give as much as $2,600 to as many candidates as they want.
In addition, they can legally give an enormous check to campaigns who could then distribute they money to individual candidates.
At the center of the Supreme Court ruling is plaintiff Shaun McCutcheon of Hoover, Ala. A self-described political activist, McCutcheon wanted to give $1,776 to each of 27 congressional candidates. He was not permitted to because the total would have exceeded the legal limit.
Al Jazeera's Sheila MacVicar sat down with Shaun McCutcheon when his case was argued before the Supreme Court in October.
Is it good or bad for there to be more money in politics?
Will lifting donation limits lead to a rise in corruption?
How will the decision affect political parties and their leaders?
We consulted a panel of experts for the Inside Story.