Trump Administration Lays Groundwork to Silence Minorities, Elderly, Youth in Future Elections

WASHINGTON – This morning, President Donald Trump called for a “major investigation” into potential voter fraud, alleging that millions of undocumented immigrants voted in the 2016 election, and that ballots were cast on behalf of the deceased.

“Donald Trump’s claims have been repeatedly debunked and are contrary to the evidence, which conclusively  shows there is no widespread voter fraud,” said Gerry Hebert, director of voting rights and redistricting at the Campaign Legal Center. “President Trump, in making these false and irresponsible statements – and by nominating Jeff Sessions to lead the Department of Justice in an era where we do not have the full protections of the Voting Rights Act – is launching an all-out assault on voting rights. Given Mr. Sessions’s history of using voter fraud prosecutions as a form of voter suppression, Donald Trump’s announcement of this ‘investigation’ rings serious alarm bells.”

“Americans should be warned,” said Danielle Lang, deputy director of voting rights for the Campaign Legal Center. “This is not just about Donald Trump’s scorned ego for losing the popular vote. These statements are laying the groundwork for a legislative agenda meant to secure future elections through voter suppression, even though several federal courts have found these tactics to be discriminatory for targeting the poor, minority or disabled voters. These voices will be silenced if we allow Trump and his administration to engage in this voting rights witch hunt.”

Donald Trump insinuates that outdated voter registration rolls are indicative of fraud. They are not, as the author of the study he relies on has made clear. Multiple studies have shown that there is virtually no evidence of voter impersonation fraud, indicating no need for strict voter ID laws or laws that make it harder, not easier to vote.

These studies have been conducted on both sides of the political aisle. A Republican National Lawyers Association (RNLA) study showed that between the years 2000 and 2010, 21 states had only one or two convictions for some form of voter irregularity. A 2014 comprehensive study by the Brennan Center for Justice found there were only 31 credible allegations of fraud in over 1 billion votes cast.

This lack of evidence is not for lack of investigation. In an attempt to justify voter suppression laws, states have repeatedly sought to investigate voter fraud and have attempted put forward evidence to support their claims. Yet every court to address this issue has found that there is no credible evidence of widespread fraud. During the George W. Bush administration, the Department of Justice launched a major campaign to investigate and prosecute voter fraud and came up empty handed. 

5^th Circuit’s Decision That the Law is Discriminatory Will Stand

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court today refused to hear the case, Veasey v. Abbott, a challenge to Texas’s voter ID law, SB 14, the strictest photo voter ID law in the country. In refusing to grant certiorari, the Supreme Court leaves in place the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, which found the law to be discriminatory. 

Campaign Legal Center attorneys represent plaintiffs Congressman Marc Veasey, LULAC and a group of Texas voters in the case.

Gerry Hebert, CLC’s director of voting rights and redistricting, issued the following statement in reaction to the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari:

“I am extremely pleased that the justices recognize that this case does not merit review at this time. The full 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and every other federal court that has heard this case has ruled Texas’s photo voter ID law is discriminatory. Now, Texas, which ranks poorly in voter participation, should work to ensure that every eligible voter in the state is able to cast a ballot going forward.”

A Texas district court is currently reviewing the issue of discriminatory intent. The 5th Circuit has held that there is sufficient evidence and Campaign Legal Center is confident the court will once again recognize the unlawful purpose behind this law. 

Pruitt Can’t Play Both Sides of a Case

WASHINGTON– Today, the Campaign Legal Center called on Scott Pruitt, President-elect Trump’s nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to recuse himself from the multiple lawsuits he brought against the agency as Attorney General of Oklahoma. Pruitt’s current ethics agreement is insufficient to avoid actual or apparent conflicts of interest, CLC explains in a letter to EPA’s Ethics Office and the Office of Government Ethics.

“Pruitt made a name for himself by suing the same agency he now seeks to lead, and if confirmed, he will be in a position of defending against—or settling—the same cases he previously initiated and supported,” said Larry Noble, general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center. “Pruitt can’t be an impartial administrator when it comes to the lawsuits he spearheaded and as EPA Administrator he must step aside from those suits to protect the integrity of the agency’s decisionmaking.”

On Pruitt’s campaign website, he boasts of his role in leading and coordinating litigation against the EPA. According to some estimates, he initiated or filed briefs in at least 26 suits against the EPA, nine of which are ongoing. The cases affect a wide range of issues including air quality standards, clean water and pollution limits.

In his ethics agreement, Pruitt argues he only has an obligation to recuse from these cases for one year, and will even seek waivers to participate before that period expires. CLC’s letter explains that the circumstances here require recusal for the duration of the litigation, and regardless of whether Oklahoma withdraws from a suit or waives any conflict.

Pruitt’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works began at 10am today.

Read the letter

WASHINGTON — Today, civil rights leaders and voting rights experts provided reaction to the confirmation hearing of Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions and discussed his voting rights history, including Gerry Hebert, who testified against Sen. Sessions this week during the hearings. Read Hebert's recent op-ed in the Washington Post, "Jeff Sessions says he handled these civil rights cases. He barely touched them" here.

Senator Sessions’ history on voting rights is, simply put, a record of hostility. He has referred to the Voting Rights Act as intrusive and is a supporter of the Supreme Court decision to gut the Act in Shelby County v. Holder. A longtime, vocal advocate for voter ID laws, Sen. Sessions admitted he had no formulated plan to defend constituents against disenfranchisement as Attorney General.

A recording of today’s event is available here.

Wade Henderson, President of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, said “This week’s confirmation hearing for Senator Sessions highlighted what’s at stake with this critical nomination and underscored why Senator Sessions is unfit to serve as our nation’s Attorney General. Judging by his record and testimony, we believe that Senator Sessions would fail to properly enforce many of our nation’s important civil rights laws and precedents, while overzealously pursuing false allegations of voter fraud and supporting policies that would make it more difficult for citizens to register to vote. Absolutely nothing that we heard or witnessed from the Senator should dispel concerns about his fitness to serve as Attorney General or reassure those worried about whether Senator Sessions would be a fair arbiter of justice for all Americans.”  

Gerry Hebert, Director of Voting Rights and Redistricting Program for the Campaign Legal Center, said, “Jeff Sessions continues to misrepresent his record to his fellow Senators. Even his responses to the supplemental questionnaire, as well as his sworn testimony about cases he continues to claim he worked on, were false.  Senators owe it to the American people to take the time to know the facts and demand the truth from Senator Sessions. It is frightening to think that Sessions will run the U.S. Department of Justice and have the opportunity to roll back voting rights through voter suppression laws in communities that have long struggled for equality and justice.”

Alabama State Senator Hank Sanders, said “Senator Session has not done justice as a U. S. Attorney, an Alabama Attorney General or U. S. Senator.  Senator Jeff Sessions cannot do justice as head of the Justice Department."

*A recording of today’s call is available here

This follows a similar response call held earlier this week with civil rights leaders, recording available here. 

President-elect’s Plans Leave Nation in Unprecedented Territory

WASHINGTON – President-elect Donald Trump made clear today he will retain retain full ownership of Trump Organization while turning over management of the business to his sons, a choice that will create the appearance, and perhaps be the case in reality, that his decisions as president are motivated by self-interest rather than what’s best for the country. It will also provide an opportunity for those seeking access, influence and favors, including from foreign countries, to personally enrich the president’s family without the public’s knowledge.

“Having Trump’s adult children lead the operational control of his business, while he still retains full ownership, is not an acceptable solution,” said Trevor Potter, president of the Campaign Legal Center. “It does not limit the potential for conflicts. There is no reason why Trump would not be fully invested in a business he founded and that is run by his adult children. His decision has created a direct path by which U.S. and foreign interests, including foreign governments, can exert influence over him through his companies or holdings.

Giving management control to his children will not solve the problem, as evidenced by other countries where family members are used as proxies to enable political figures to amass wealth from domestic and foreign interests seeking to buy influence with the nation’s leader by enriching their family. The United States should not follow this path.”

“President-elect Trump has put himself, his administration, and the nation on the wrong path today – one that was completely avoidable,” said Larry Noble, general counsel of the Campaign Legal Center. “Every modern president before him protected the integrity of the office by converting all personal investments to government bonds or broad investment funds. This is the only way to assure the public that presidential decisions made on behalf of the American people are not clouded by self-interest. Now we are in uncharted and dangerous territory. It is not clear if foreign governments will try to exert influence over Trump through his family’s companies or holdings, or how potential violations of the Emoluments Clauses will be dealt with, or how many times the president will be caught up in legal entanglements involving his interests.  But it is clear that neither President-elect Trump nor the American people need these distractions.”

Potter added: "It is not unique for a president-elect with private business interests to need to take steps to avoid conflicts of interest, such as selling those interests and creating blind trusts. This situation is unique because the president-elect thinks he is above the laws and traditions his predecessors followed out of an abundance of caution – to avoid even the appearance of a potential conflict.”

CLC joined a bipartisan coalition of organizations and individuals in signing a letter that urged President-elect Trump to protect the integrity of his presidency by divesting his assets into a qualified blind trust managed by an independent trustee.