U.S. court to rule on part of campaign finance law

WASHINGTON, Jan 11 (Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to rule on a part of the U.S. campaign finance law that allows congressional candidates to accept bigger contributions when they run against opponents who spend large amounts of their own money.

The provision, known as the "millionaire's amendment" was part of the 2002 federal campaign finance reform law. Congress adopted the provision out of concern over the competitive advantage that wealthy, self-financing candidates would have.

The amendment is triggered when a candidate for the House of Representatives spends more than $350,000 in personal funds. The opponent then can gather contributions three times the normal limit from individuals and may coordinate with their political party for additional contributions above the limit.

The law was challenged by Jack Davis, a wealthy, Buffalo, New York-area Democrat who narrowly lost a congressional race in 2006.

Davis spent more than $2.2 million of his own money in 2006, but lost to incumbent Republican Rep. Thomas Reynolds by 51 percent to 49 percent.

Davis argued the provision violated the constitutional free-speech rights of self-financed candidates and constitutional equal protection rights by giving opponents of self-financed candidates an unfair competitive advantage.

A three-judge federal court rejected his challenge.

The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the case in April and to issue a ruling by the end of June. The decision could affect the congressional elections in November, especially those House races in which self-funding candidates are running, according to campaign finance law experts. (Reporting by James Vicini, Editing by Eric Walsh)