WASHINGTON — On January 30, 2026, Campaign Legal Center and OpenSecrets won their lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission (FEC) over the FEC’s failure to provide transparency of the largest donations to political parties. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the FEC has illegally failed to act on a formal petition to set rules for reporting money in the parties’ “special purpose” accounts. This decision is a major step forward for protecting transparency and accountability in election spending.

In 2014, Congress amended the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) to allow wealthy donors to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to certain political party accounts. Collectively, that means an individual can now contribute upwards of $1.8 million to a single party over a two-year election cycle.

OpenSecrets and Campaign Legal Center formally petitioned the FEC to set rules for how political parties must publicly report these transactions. But more than a decade after Congress changed the law, the FEC has still failed to issue rules — in response to the rulemaking petition submitted by OpenSecrets and Campaign Legal Center or otherwise. The FEC’s inaction deprives voters of meaningful transparency regarding how national party committees are using these supercharged accounts.

The court found that the FEC has violated the law by failing to act on OpenSecrets and Campaign Legal Center’s petition. The court started the process of setting a deadline for FEC action and is retaining jurisdiction to monitor the agency’s progress going forward.

“Voters have a right to know who is giving huge amounts of money to political parties, and where that money is going. For more than a decade, the FEC has done nothing to provide this transparency, and so has failed its public mission,” said Adav Noti, executive director for Campaign Legal Center. “The federal District Court ruling is a step in the right direction, and we will make sure the FEC complies with the court’s order by providing full transparency of the billions of dollars raised and spent by our nation’s political parties.”

“For more than a decade, over a billion dollars has moved through the national parties’ special accounts with minimal oversight, effectively creating a shadow campaign finance system,” said Hilary Braseth, executive director of OpenSecrets. “You cannot hold power accountable if you cannot follow the money. This ruling makes clear that the FEC cannot sidestep its responsibility to the electorate, and we look forward to a reporting framework that finally allows the public to see the full picture.”

Follow the latest updates via Campaign Legal Center’s case page.  

BOSTON — Today, voting rights and prisoners’ rights advocates filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts’ highest court seeking an order compelling Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin to release reports on jail-based voting, as required by a landmark state law enacted to expand voting rights protections. Since the enactment of the VOTES Act in 2022, Secretary Galvin has failed to file any reports on jail-based voting, shielding this data from disclosure and impeding public awareness. Without jail-based voting data, Massachusetts residents, community organizations, and the state legislature cannot hold public officials accountable for implementing the VOTES Act.

The complaint was filed against Secretary Galvin by Lawyers for Civil Rights and Campaign Legal Center, with pro bono support from Anderson & Kreiger and the Law Office of John Reinstein, on behalf of Franklin Hobbs, eleni kalfus, DeAnza Cook, Alan Tanner, Kadeem Foreman, and Justin “Rico” Rodriguez, highlighting that at any given time, up to 9,000 incarcerated citizens in Massachusetts are eligible to vote. These include people serving misdemeanor sentences, individuals awaiting trial, and those who are civilly committed. These individuals have the right to vote and should not be disenfranchised.

“This is an urgent moment to hold people in our democracy accountable,” petitioner Pastor Franklin Hobbs stated. “The jail voting provisions of the VOTES Act were written by and advocated for by incarcerated people, who are too often left out of the democratic process. This report is imperative to tell us where we are in the implementation process, so that we can improve it moving forward and take seriously voting access for this population.” Hobbs is the founder of Healing Our Land, Inc., which facilitates and supports voter registration initiatives in the Suffolk County House of Corrections and Nashua Street Jail.

Petitioner eleni kalfus, who works with the coalition Empowering Descendant Communities to Unlock Democracy, regularly visits the two Boston jails to assist eligible incarcerated individuals to register to vote and apply for absentee ballots so they can participate in local, state, and federal elections. “When I go to the jails to talk to incarcerated voters, they tell me about the issues they’ve had when trying to vote,” said kalfus. “I want them to know we’re fighting for them and doing what we can to hold the state accountable.”

To ensure these voters are not excluded from the democratic process, the VOTES Act requires Secretary Galvin to submit public reports within six months of each statewide election detailing the number of eligible incarcerated voters and whether they were able to vote by mail or absentee ballot. Two statewide elections have occurred since the VOTES Act took effect — one seventeen months ago — yet no reports have been released by Secretary Galvin.

“These reports are crucial for transparency and accountability,” said Brooke Simone, an attorney with Lawyers for Civil Rights. “The VOTES Act was designed to make sure that eligible voters in jail are not shut out of our democracy. When Secretary Galvin fails to release this data, it doesn’t just violate state law—it allows constitutional rights to be denied behind closed doors, with no public scrutiny or oversight.”

Petitioner Dr. DeAnza Cook, who teaches civic education classes to incarcerated individuals, shared that “incarcerated voters are part of our communities, our neighborhoods, and our democracy. When the state withholds basic information about their voting access, it sends a message about who is seen as belonging. We’re here to insist that they do belong.”

Petitioner Alan Tanner stated that “people’s voices need to be heard, and that can’t happen if information is being withheld. In order to empower people, we have to make sure there is transparency from our elected officials.”

The lawsuit was also brought by two individuals who were incarcerated at MCI-Norfolk, a state correctional facility, until late last month. Drawing on his firsthand experience in a correctional setting, Kadeem Foreman shared, “people inside are trying to stay connected to their communities. Voting is one of the few ways they can do that. If the state won’t even report whether those votes are possible, it tells you how little their connection is valued.”

Justin “Rico” Rodriguez shared, “my community has a long history of fighting for redress of the harms we’ve experienced when elected officials have failed us. This report is part of that fight, and I’m glad to be fighting for the people that I come from and the people that I love, including those still in prison who don't often get heard.”

The lawsuit asks the court to order Secretary Galvin to immediately issue the required reports and fulfill his statutory duty to ensure transparency and accountability in jail-based voting.

“We should be working to make our elections more inclusive and accessible, and that includes ensuring that reports on jail voting are filed as required by the VOTES Act,” stated Kate Uyeda, legal counsel for Campaign Legal Center. “These reports help ensure that fully eligible voters are not left out of the democratic process simply because they are detained during an election. We are asking the court to hold Secretary Galvin accountable and order him to issue the required reports.”

You can follow along with this case as it progresses with our case page here.

###

The nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center advances democracy through law. We safeguard the freedom to vote, defend voters’ right to know who is spending money to influence elections, and work to ensure public trust in our elected officials.

Learn more about CLC. Don't miss out on our latest resources: Subscribe to President Trevor Potter's newsletter on LinkedIn or email, tune in to the latest season of our award-winning podcast, Democracy Decoded, and join our livestreamed events.

WASHINGTON — On January 30, 2026, another key part of the president’s anti-voter executive order attempting to require burdensome registration requirements for military and overseas voters was permanently halted. 

The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Secure Families Initiative (SFI) and Arizona Students’ Association (ASA) — represented by Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and Democracy Defenders Fund (DDF) — sought to prevent the secretary of defense from taking any action to implement Section 3(d) of the president's March 25, 2025, executive order. In its opinion, the court further determined that Section 3(d) violated the constitutional separation of powers and cannot be enforced. 

Danielle Lang, vice president for voting rights and the rule of law at Campaign Legal Center, released the following statement:

“Our democracy works best when all Americans can participate, including members of our military and their families living overseas. Today’s ruling removes a very real threat to the freedom to vote for overseas military families and upholds the separation of powers. It is yet another legal victory affirming what we already know: The president does not have the authority to dictate who can vote or how our elections are run.” 

Read more about how Campaign Legal Center is holding the current administration accountable at this link.

EUGENE, Ore. — On January 26, 2026, a federal judge dismissed the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit seeking Oregon’s complete voter rolls, which contain Oregon voters’ private information. States, not the federal government, administer elections, including ensuring their voter rolls are up to date. Campaign Legal Center, alongside the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and the ACLU, submitted an amicus brief in November 2025 on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Oregon and the ACLU of Oregon arguing that the DOJ’s actions undermine the freedom to vote and voter privacy.

“This is a clear victory for Oregon voters and for the principle that our personal information should not be treated as a federal free-for-all,” said Mark Kendall, president of the League of Women Voters of Oregon. “The court’s decision affirms Oregon’s strong privacy protections and sends an important message: Safeguarding voters’ private data is essential to maintaining trust in our democratic system. The League is proud to stand with Oregonians in defending these rights.”

“This ruling reinforces a fundamental principle for voters everywhere: Our democracy depends on protecting people’s personal information from unnecessary government intrusion,” said Caren Short, director of Legal and Research for the League of Women Voters. “By rejecting this attempt to compel states to hand over sensitive voter data, the court affirmed that voter privacy is not optional and cannot be overridden by federal overreach. The League is involved in several similar cases around the country and will continue to fight to protect voters, their data and our democracy.”

"Protecting the freedom to vote also means protecting voters from unnecessary government intrusion into their private lives,” said Theresa J. Lee, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Voting Rights Project. “Voters participate when they feel safe, respected and protected, and this decision affirms that voter privacy is not negotiable. While the DOJ continues to attack voter privacy, we'll be defending it at every turn."

“This decision is a win for the rule of law, our constitutional structure and, most importantly, Oregonians,” said Brent Ferguson, director of strategic litigation at Campaign Legal Center. “The DOJ should be working to enforce hard-fought voter protections, not trying to abuse its power to force states to hand over the sensitive and personal information of their voters. Recent actions by the DOJ endanger Americans’ freedom to vote and trample on election processes entrusted to the states. This victory affirms the power of Oregon and other states across the country to regulate and administer their own elections without improper overreach by the executive branch.”

“The dismissal of the Justice Department’s case is a victory for Oregon voters’ privacy and for free and fair elections,” said Eileen O’Connor, former attorney in the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department and Brennan Center senior counsel. “States administer their elections, not the federal government.”

Our democracy is strongest when every eligible voter can meaningfully exercise their freedom to vote, and Campaign Legal Center, the League of Women Voters of Oregon, ACLU of Oregon, and the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law are working together to protect that freedom.

###

The nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center advances democracy through law. We safeguard the freedom to vote, defend voters’ right to know who is spending money to influence elections, and work to ensure public trust in our elected officials.

Learn more about CLC. Don't miss out on our latest resources: Subscribe to President Trevor Potter's newsletter on LinkedIn or email, tune in to the latest season of our award-winning podcast, Democracy Decoded, and join our livestreamed events.