The U.S. Supreme Court today put a temporary hold on distributing matching funds to publicly-funded candidates in Arizona, a provision that's similar to one in Maine's Clean Elections law.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision on Arizona's campaign financing law is being closely watched in Maine. The court today temporarily stopped Arizona from distributing matching campaign funds to publicly-financed candidates, after opponents challenged the law in court.

The matching funds are intended to allow publicly-funded candidates to keep up with privately-financed opponents with big campaign coffers. Maine's Clean Elections law has a similar provision for triggering matching contributions for publicly-funded candidates facing big-spending opponents.

But the Supreme Court today granted a stay request from opponents of Arizona's law which will prevent the state from doling out the next round of public payments, scheduled for June 22. The court granted the request while deciding whether to take up the constitutionality of Arizona's Clean Elections law.

Maine 1st District Congresswoman Chellie Pingree today criticized the court's decision. "The system has worked well in Maine and in states that have followed Maine's lead, like Arizona and Connecticut," Pingree says in a statement. "But it seems that the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roberts has set out to systematically dismantle the campaign finance reforms that people around the country have adopted."

Pingree is pushing for a federal Clean Elections law called the Fair Elections Now Act, with Connecticut Democrat John Larson. She says the law she's proposing avoids the matching funds provision that triggered the court battle. Instead, she says, candidates would receive a four-to-one match based on their own fundraising, not that of their opponent or independent spending.

The Supreme Court's stay on the Arizona law is expected to last through the November election. The stay would dissolve if the court decides not to take the case, according to the Washington Post.