In 2000, plaintiffs Christine Beaumont and North Carolina Right to Life (NCRL) challenged the constitutionality of a federal law prohibiting corporations and labor unions from making direct contributions to candidates, as the prohibition applied to a nonprofit corporation whose primary purpose was to engage in political advocacy. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found for the plaintiffs, extending a narrow exception to the ban on the use of corporate or union treasury funds for electioneering expenditures so it also applied to contributions. The Supreme Court upheld the corporate contribution prohibition in 2003, stating in its 7-2 opinion that it could not hold for the plaintiffs “without recasting our understanding of the risks of harm posed by corporate political contributions, of the expressive significance of contributions, and of the consequent deference owed to legislative judgments on what to do about them.”

The lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 - eleven suits brought by more than 80 plaintiffs - were consolidated as McConnell v. FEC. The defendants in the case were the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Election Commission; the Act's principal congressional sponsors - Senators McCain, Feingold, Snowe and Jeffords and Congressmen Meehan and Shays -were intervenor-defendants. The Legal Center 's attorneys were among the counsel to the congressional sponsors.

A three-judge trial panel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a mixed decision on the law's constitutionality on May 1, 2003.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision on December 10, 2004, upholding all key aspects of the Reform Act.