Cockrum v. Trump (DDC)

WASHINGTON – Today, the Campaign Legal Center (CLC) is urging that Kellyanne Conway be removed from office or given a lengthy suspension without pay for willfully and repeatedly disregarding ethics requirements.

Yesterday, Kellyanne Conway appeared on CNN’s New Day and, after being introduced with her official title and while standing in front of the White House, spent fifteen minutes defending U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore and advocating against the election of his opponent, Doug Jones. As CLC outlines in its complaint to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), her actions violate the Hatch Act, which bars executive branch officials from using their positions to influence elections. Moreover, Conway appeared to acknowledge Hatch Act concerns during the interview, but she then dismissed and even went so far as to mock efforts to hold her accountable for violations of basic ethical requirements.

Conway similarly violated the Hatch Act less than a month ago during an appearance on Fox & Friends. CLC filed a complaint with OSC based on that violation.

“The willfulness of Conway’s violation and her openly expressed disdain for efforts to hold her accountable for complying with ethics requirements make clear that anything less than removal from the federal service or a lengthy unpaid suspension will not deter future misconduct on her part,” said Walter Shaub, senior director, ethics at CLC, and the former director of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE). “Lower-level federal employees have incurred severe penalties for less serious Hatch Act violations, and OSC should not have one standard for the federal workforce generally and a lower standard for those who are close to this President.”

CLC’s complaint notes multiple examples of executive branch employees suffering serious repercussions for Hatch Act violations.

• Earlier this year, OSC sought removal of a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) employee for repeated Hatch Act violations.
• In 2015, OSC secured a 112-day suspension for a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) employee who engaged in partisan political activity in the workplace and solicited political contributions.
• In 2014, OSC secured the resignation of a Federal Election Commission (FEC) attorney who had posted partisan political tweets and participated in an online media interview from an FEC facility where she criticized the Republican Party and its presidential candidate.
• Also in 2014, OSC levied a 100-day unpaid suspension against an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employee who urged callers to to reelect President Obama over an IRS help line.
• OSC also secured a 14-day suspension of an IRS employee who criticized Republicans in her conversations with a taxpayer.

Read Walter Shaub’s November 27 op ed in the Washington Post discussing Ms. Conway’s violation of the Hatch Act and OSC’s responsibility to hold her accountable. 

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate is moving toward a final vote on the nomination of Kirstjen Nielsen, the Trump Administration’s nominee for Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary. The Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a complaint last month urging an investigation into potential ethics violations arising from Nielsen being guided through the confirmation process by a private consultant, Thad Bingel, who represents companies seeking millions in DHS contracts.

Brendan Fischer, director, federal and FEC reform at CLC, released the following statement:

“Nielsen’s pending confirmation makes it even more important that these potential ethics violations be investigated. The unusual arrangement between Nielsen and a consultant representing DHS contractors raises potential conflicts of interest for Nielsen in her role as DHS secretary, and risks undermining the integrity of the contracting process.”

Complaint: CLC called for an investigation on November 13.

WASHINGTON – Today, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) called on the Senate to ensure that the appropriations bill does not further expand the role of big money in our political system.

A letter sent to Chairman Cochran and Vice Chairman Leahy by CLC called on the Senate to oppose appropriations measures that would supercharge the problems arising from massive checks to joint fundraising committees and that would protect dark money.

Trevor Potter, president of CLC, and a former Republican Chairman of the Federal Election Commission said: “It is critically important that the appropriations bill not be used to further entrench the role of secret, unaccountable money in our political process. The tax bills should not undermine important protections for democracy by handing megadonors even more power over our elections.”

Brendan Fischer, director, federal and FEC reform program at CLC said: “If adopted, these measures have the potential to make an already problematic campaign finance system even worse. Giving presidential candidates even more control over how massive joint fundraising committee checks are spent only further tilts the political playing field toward the interests of megadonors rather than voters.”

How the appropriations bill could expand the role of big money:

1. First, an appropriations measure altering party coordinated spending limits would supercharge the big money problems arising from six- and seven-figure donations raised through joint fundraising committees. As we saw in the 2016 cycle, the tens of millions raised by the presidential candidates for their joint fundraising committees was eventually routed from the state parties to the DNC or the RNC, but there were limits on how much a presidential candidate could control how that money was spent. The appropriations bill eviscerates those limits, allowing presidential candidates control over how the parties spend the massive checks raised through joint fundraisers.

2. Second, other appropriations measures appear to prohibit the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from enforcing existing laws limiting tax-exempt entities from engaging in partisan political activities, and from issuing new rules defining nonprofit political activity. This deprives tax-exempt groups of the clarity needed to protect robust civic engagement, while allowing dark money actors to continue abusing their tax-exempt status.

3. Third, the appropriations bill prohibits the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) from studying or implementing a rule requiring public companies to disclose political spending to shareholders.

Read CLC's blog on these issues.

Alabama faces another election on December 12, while the state continues to deny as many as a quarter of a million Alabamians their right to vote

WASHINGTON –  Many people with past felony convictions won’t be able to vote in Alabama’s special election on December 12 due to the state’s discriminatory felony disenfranchisement laws. Campaign Legal Center today released a video highlighting stories of voters whose voices are silenced in the state. Their stories represent a nationwide problem.

Watch the video.

“We need to move toward a system that is free and fair and everyone’s voice is heard,” said Danielle Lang, senior legal counsel, voting rights and redistricting at CLC. “Our clients are tax-paying, hard-working citizens with a stake in their communities but without a voice in their government. Our democracy works best when all citizens can vote without barriers, and all people deserve a second chance. Citizens who have served their time deserve to participate in our democracy.”

Alabama is still one of 12 states that restrict voting rights even after a person has served his or her prison sentence and is no longer on probation or parole. An estimated quarter of a million Alabamians or more in the state are disenfranchised because of the state’s law. According to most recent estimates, that is up to 7.6 percent of the entire statewide voting-age population and 15.1 percent of the black voting-age population. It affects six million people throughout the United States.

“I work, I pay taxes, I do all the things that everybody else does, but when it comes down to voting, I can’t voice my opinion on anything that matters,” said Treva Thompson, a disenfranchised Alabama citizen who is the named plaintiff in CLC’s lawsuit and who is featured in the video.

Thompson is trying to pay off her restitution to regain the right to vote, but according to her estimate, it would take her 73 years to pay off fines and fees necessary to vote under current law. Alabama is one of several states that hinge restoration of rights on an individual’s ability to pay past fines and fees. CLC  challenges this requirement as nothing more than a modern day poll tax in a lawsuit before a federal district court, Thompson v. Alabama.

This video shows the real world impact of felony disenfranchisement laws in Alabama and nationwide. “It’s not about black or white, it’s not about Democrat or Republican, it’s about right or wrong,” said Pastor Kenneth Glasgow, leader of the Ordinary People Society, who is featured in the video.

Alabama’s law not only disenfranchises hundreds of thousands of people with past convictions but its confusing and haphazard application has threatened the rights of many more.

Alabama disenfranchises individuals with certain felony convictions, so-called “crimes of moral turpitude.” For many years, the state did not define “moral turpitude” or create a complete list of felonies that disqualify a voter. This led to widespread confusion and many people being wrongly told by registrars that they could not vote, when they should have never lost their rights.

On May 17, 2017, the Alabama Legislature passed a bill that defined what crimes involve "moral turpitude" for the purposes of determining which citizens can vote. However, the state has not made a significant effort to correct many years of registrars erroneously denying the right to vote to people who were convicted of crimes that are not considered disqualifying under the new law. The state voter registration form still does not include the list of disqualifying crimes.

CLC is working with advocates on the ground – including the Ordinary People Society, Greater Birmingham Ministries, Alabama Nonviolent Offenders Organization and others – to educate Alabamians about their rights since the law was clarified, because the state has refused to allocate state resources for such outreach.

CLC developed a voting rights restoration toolkit for Alabama citizens to determine if they have the right to vote and follow a simple process to restore their rights, if eligible. While the registration deadline passed for this election, citizens can begin the process for 2018.

CLC’s filed its lawsuit challenging Alabama’s felony disenfranchisement law eight months before Alabama clarified its law. The passage of HB 282 was a step in the right direction but does not address the underlying discrimination of Alabama's system or its conditioning restoration of the right to vote based on wealth. CLC represents individuals in Alabama who are U.S. citizens with past felony convictions, seeking the right to vote.

Read the stories of our plaintiffs and learn more about the case.

Watch and share the video.

A federal appeals court ruled in Holmes v. FEC that under the First Amendment, Congress can separate contribution limits for primaries and general elections. Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case to protect contribution limits from a legal challenge from a group that opposes regulation of the campaign finance system.

“The court was right to uphold contribution limits,” said Tara Malloy, senior director of appellate litigation at CLC. “Reasonable limits in election spending are necessary so government doesn’t just respond to wealthy donors and special interests when it should be responding to all Americans.”

Read the opinion.

Read our blog about the case.

CLC Litigators and Policy Experts Weigh in on the Upcoming State Fights, from California to Connecticut

This event took place on December 14, 2017. To listen to a recording of the call, click here.

In 2017, we have seen an administration with unprecedented conflicts of interest, foreign actors exploiting loopholes in our political disclosure laws, legislative and regulatory failures and skyrocketing “independent” campaign spending.

Americans are concerned about where our democracy is headed, and we’re fighting on more fronts than ever before. But with federal legislative reform stalled, and in the face of misguided Supreme Court decisions, our fight in states and localities across the nation is arguably equally important to saving our democracy.

In advance of the 2018 election, CLC is engaged in policy reform and litigation nationwide to support and defend strong transparency laws, contribution limits and public financing measures. Learn about why these state and local laws and initiatives are crucial to the future health of our democracy. 


Thursday, December 14 from noon to 1 p.m. EST

Featuring:

Catie Kelley, CLC director, policy and state programs
Tara Malloy, CLC senior director, appellate litigation
Adav Noti, CLC senior director, trial litigation (moderator)