A case with big political implications goes before the U.S. Supreme Court. It's a case that comes from Western New York and it challenges restrictions put on wealthy people running for office.

Jack Davis says it's his constitutional right to spend what he wants on his race for congress. But opponents argue other candidates should have a chance to raise just as much money.

"That's a big event in my life," Davis said of his case going to the Supreme Court. "Not many men challenge and get their challenge accepted by the Supreme Court."

The Akron businessman is fighting what's called the "Millionaires Amendment," a provision in the campaign finance reform act that allows higher contribution limits for candidates running against wealthy opponents. Democrat Davis is ready to spend $3 million to replace the retiring Republican Tom Reynolds. Under the Millionaire's Amendment, once Davis spends $350,000, his challengers can triple their take on individual contributions -- from $2,300 to $6,900. "Congress is controlled by special interest money and what this amendment does, the Millionaire's Amendment, it makes more money cause more corruption in Washington," said Davis.

"We think the provision is constitutional," said Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer, which joined in a brief opposing Davis' case. Concerned about the influence of big money in U.S. Politics, Wertheimer doesn't think the "Millionaire's Amendment" favors incumbents, "It basically favors anyone who is running against a wealthy individual."

Davis is facing a primary battle with Jonathan Powers and Alice Kryzan. Both candidates declined to comment to 7 News. Davis says no matter what the Supreme Court decides, it won't change his campaign. "Whether I win or lose today is important for America but I'm still in the fight to save American jobs, farms and industries," said Davis.

A ruling in this case is weeks away. It could be late June or July before the Supreme Court makes a decision.