Also known as the McCain-Feingold Act, BCRA placed tighter restrictions on the amounts of money the national political parties could raise and how it could be spent. According to an RNC press release, the lawsuits will allege the legislation infringes on the First Amendment rights of the parties to free political speech and association.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) today announced it will file lawsuits in the District of Columbia and Louisiana challenging, respectively, the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act’s ban on national parties raising and spending non-federal dollars, and the constitutionality of political party coordinated expenditure limits. The RNC does so to defend its interests as a national party committee with varied interests, including both state and federal elections, as well as redistricting and grassroots lobbying.

RNC Chairman Mike Duncan issued the following statement:

“The RNC must have the ability to support state candidates, coordinate expenditures with our candidates, and truly engage in political activity on a national level. The RNC has operated under and complied with these provisions of the law since their enactment, and as applied it is unconstitutional.”

Opposition to McCain-Feingold on First Amendment grounds has been a pet issue of conservatives ever since the law was enacted. The law survived a previous challenge in the 2003 Supreme Court case, McConnell v. Federal Election Commission.

The timing of the new lawsuits are instructive. McCain made his work on passing BCRA the centerpiece of his efforts to rebuild his career following his embarrassing implication in the Keating Five corruption scandal in the early 1990s. During the 2008 presidential campaign, McCain frequently referenced BCRA as evidence of his “maverick” qualities and his willingness to buck his own party.

The RNC may have been handcuffed from launching a legal challenge earlier to the act knowing that McCain harbored presidential ambitions. A lawsuit against his signature legislation, particularly if it was successful, could have severely damaged McCain’s prospects. Now that McCain is more or less resigned to finishing his career in the U.S. Senate, the party is freer to challenge the law without hurting its presidential candidate.

The drubbing Republicans took in both the House and Senate no doubt gave an added incentive to reverse the limits placed on the amount of money the party can contribute to individual candidates.

Adding insult to injury, a successful challenge to the legislation’s constitutionality could obviously have a significant impact on McCain’s legacy.