Hebert tells of racial insensitivity by Sessions, exposes willful inaccuracies in his questionnaire, and explains the harm he would do to voting rights as AG

WASHINGTON – Today, Gerry Hebert, director of voting rights and redistricting program at the Campaign Legal Center has submitted written testimony for the Jan. 10-11 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Jeff Sessions for U.S. Attorney General, opposing Mr. Sessions’ nomination. The testimony is based on Mr. Hebert’s personal experience with Mr. Sessions, his long career as a civil and voting rights attorney, and his personal knowledge of falsehoods in Mr. Sessions’ questionnaire.

Mr. Hebert worked at the Department of Justice from 1973 to 1994 as its acting chief, deputy chief and special litigation counsel in the voting section of the civil rights division. He became acquainted with Mr. Sessions in when Sessions was U.S. Attorney in Mobile, Alabama and Mr. Hebert was litigating several voting rights cases in the state. During that time, Mr. Sessions made several racially insensitive remarks to Mr. Hebert. He appeared to agree with a statement that a white civil rights lawyer was “a disgrace to his race” and accused the ACLU and NAACP of “trying to force civil rights down the throats of people.”  After Mr. Hebert’s testimony before the Judiciary Committee in 1986 about those remarks, Sessions became the second nominee in 50 years to be voted down by the Senate for a federal judgeship.

“Sessions’ record to date only reinforces the Judiciary Committee’s concerns about his commitment to civil rights thirty years ago. He has not worked to protect civil rights but rather worked against them at every turn,” said Gerry Hebert, director of voting rights and redistricting at the Campaign Legal Center.

Mr. Sessions has an exceptionally poor record on voting rights, which includes the prosecution of innocent civil rights leaders engaged in voter registration efforts, the irresponsible fostering of a voter fraud myth as a cover for voter suppression, and the embrace of the Supreme Court’s gutting of the Voting Rights Act in the Shelby County ruling. His record across subject areas demonstrates a disdain for civil rights protections meant to further equal representation and justice under the law.

“I first testified about Sessions 31 years ago and his allies threatened my job. I didn’t back down then and I’m not backing down now. If Mr. Sessions runs the Justice Department, he will seek to turn back the clock to a darker time in American history. I do not have faith that he will enforce basic civil rights laws that ensure equal protection of the law for all Americans, especially minorities, women, and the LGBT community.”

Finally, as Mr. Hebert has publicly explained alongside his DOJ colleagues, Sessions has not been honest with the American people or the Judiciary Committee about his record. In an attempt to deflect from his long and disqualifying record of hostility to civil rights, Mr. Sessions has claimed to have “personally handled” several civil rights cases as the U.S. Attorney in the 1980s. In fact, Mr. Hebert and his colleagues litigated these cases with no substantive input from Mr. Sessions whatsoever. These falsehoods cannot and should not fly under the radar. If he wants to be appointed the nation’s top law enforcement official, Mr. Sessions must first answer for his true, dismal record on civil rights.

To date, a diverse coalition of law professors from 170 law schools in 48 states have signed a letter opposing the confirmation of Jeff Sessions for AG.

Agency Admonishes Stations that Failed to Abide by Public File Requirement of the Communications Act

The Federal Communications Commission admonished several broadcast stations for failing to protect voters’ right to know who is behind political ads in the 2016 Election and prior elections. 

The action on Friday came in response to complaints filed by the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, Sunlight Foundation and Benton Foundation, represented by Institute for Public Representation of Georgetown University Law Center.  The agency issued two separate orders (responding to 2014 complaint and 2016 complaint). In the orders, the FCC construed the public file rules expansively, warning broadcast stations that they must comply with FCC requirements going forward.

“This is a victory for transparency and accountability,” said Meredith McGehee, strategic adviser for CLC. “The FCC, through these orders, indicates that it takes the public file requirement of the Communications Act seriously.  It is the FCC’s responsibility to ensure stations disclose information about who pays for advertisements. These rules play a critical role in ensuring voters have the information they need and deserve.  I hope stations will heed this warning and stop freely ignoring existing regulations with impunity.”

The FCC stopped short of fining the stations at this time. Following the FCC’s order, two Republican commissioners indicated that while they agree with the substantive analysis of the orders, they would like to continue to take up the issue in the Trump Administration. 

"Transparency is what the law requires and democracy demands,” said Michael Copps, former FCC Commissioner and Common Cause Special Adviser. “Good on the Commission for taking this important step to disclosing secret money. The next and most important step is accountable ads with in-ad, on-air disclosure of secret money funders."

CLC issued a report in 2016 highlighting how frequently broadcast stations neglect to collect and report political ad sponsors and called for aggressive FCC enforcement of the regulations.

FCC Order in Response to 2014 Complaints

FCC Order in Response to 2016 Complaint

Smith Will Lead Groundbreaking Litigation to Advance Key Protections for Democracy  

 WASHINGTON – The Campaign Legal Center is extremely pleased to welcome to its staff one of the nation’s leading attorneys, Paul M. Smith, as vice president of litigation and strategy. Mr. Smith brings more than three decades of experience litigating a wide range of cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, including cases advancing free speech and civil rights. [Read full bio]

“The 2016 Election made it exceptionally clear: Our democracy is not working as it should,” said Trevor Potter, president of the Campaign Legal Center. “Currently, office holders are too responsive to special interests while legislators are manipulating voting maps to stay in power. At this crucial time in our nation’s history, CLC is committed to advancing legal strategies that will guarantee a democracy responsive to the people. There is absolutely no better person to lead this effort than Paul M. Smith.”

Mr. Smith will work directly with CLC’s talented team of campaign finance attorneys. CLC will be seeking a new director of trial litigation, to be hired in early 2017.

“I am thrilled to be joining the country’s top legal shop fighting for our democracy,” said Paul M. Smith, vice president of litigation and strategy at the Campaign Legal Center. “Now, more than ever, we must commit to ensuring that every American can participate in choosing our elected officials and holding those officials accountable once they are in office. I’m looking forward to getting to work.”

Mr. Smith, who has extensive experience in voting rights and redistricting, will also work side-by-side with long-time colleague and friend, Gerry Hebert, director of CLC’s voting rights and redistricting program. When CLC’s landmark partisan gerrymandering case, Whitford v. Gill, reaches the U.S. Supreme Court next term, as seems almost certain, Mr. Smith will present the oral argument.

Prior to joining CLC, Mr. Smith most recently served as a partner at the law firm Jenner & Block. In addition to his role at CLC, Mr. Smith will teach as a Distinguished Visitor from Practice at Georgetown University Law Center.   

“All of us at Jenner & Block will greatly miss Paul,” said Terrence J. Truax, Jenner & Block’s managing partner. “But we also are excited to see him begin the next chapter of a remarkable career, using his many talents at Georgetown Law School and the Campaign Legal Center on election law issues. Paul’s accomplishments are legendary, from his groundbreaking work in Lawrence v. Texas, to his more recent leadership on a range of issues focused on equal protection for all Americans. He is truly one of those larger-than-life individuals who has made a mark. We are proud to have been able to call Paul our partner, and he will always be a part of the Jenner & Block family, our tradition of excellence and commitment to pro bono and community service.”

 [Read Paul M. Smith’s full bio]

WASHINGTON  – The Campaign Legal Center filed a letter today with the Federal Election Commission providing additional evidence that private prison company GEO Group illegally contributed a total of $225,000 to the Donald Trump-affiliated super PAC Rebuilding America Now, in violation of the 75-year-old ban on government contractors making political contributions.

“By contributing to a super PAC closely associated with Trump—the only presidential nominee to endorse private prisons—GEO presumably sought to influence the government contracting process and to ensure that a Trump administration would protect its access to taxpayer dollars,” said Brendan Fischer, associate counsel for the Campaign Legal Center.

“Government contracting is the most obvious way for a politician to reward friends and political donors, which is why companies that receive contracts have been banned for 75 years from making political contributions. Officials are supposed to decide how taxpayer money is spent based on what's best for the public, not based on what's best for their big money backers.”

Today’s filing is a follow-up letter to CLC’s original complaint filed on Nov. 1, 2016 after GEO gave  $100,000 to Rebuilding America Now the day after the Obama Administration announced it would be ending private prison government contracts. GEO receives 45 percent of its annual revenue from federal contracts, and its stock soared the day after Trump’s election.

The filing describes how the GEO subsidiary that made the $225,000 in contributions, GEO Corrections Holdings, Inc., is listed as the “employer” in multiple labor relations cases involving federally-contracted detention facilities, and has stated in state and federal proceedings that it operates detention facilities. Additionally, both GEO Group and GEO Corrections Holdings, Inc. are effectively indistinguishable and both appear to rely on taxpayer funds for their operations.  

The company also contributed $200,000 to the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC associated with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and last year gave $100,000 to super PAC supporting Sen. Marco Rubio’s presidential bid.

CLC filed a similar complaint in July against a super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton, Priorities USA Action, for accepting a $200,000 contribution from a federal contractor, Suffolk Construction Company.

CLC more recently filed complaints with the FEC against both the Trump and Clinton campaigns for coordinating with their super PACs in violation of federal law.

CLC and D21 Submit Comments Calling for “Public Communication” Definition to Include Mobile Ads, Address “Internet Exemption” loophole

The Federal Election Commission is updating and clarifying its rules for the 21st century.

Last week the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 submitted comments in support of the agency’s proposal to revise the definition of “public communication” to take into account that paid ads seen on Internet applications are no different than paid ads seen on websites.

Because the current definition was drafted a decade ago, when websites were the predominant outlet for paid internet advertising, it is silent on digital ads that appear on mobile apps.  But digital political ads are increasingly viewed on apps rather than a browser window: $1 billion was spent on digital advertising in the 2016 election cycle, about half of which went towards mobile and social ads.

For example, Facebook has emerged as a major source of campaign spending --the National Republican Congressional Committee reportedly increased its Facebook advertising by 1,500%, and Trump’s campaign “embraced Facebook as a key advertising channel in a way that no presidential campaign has before”—and almost 60 percent of Facebook users access the social network exclusively from the Facebook app. As the letter notes: 

“It would be absurd if a paid political Facebook ad were considered a ‘public communication’ when viewed on the Facebook website, but now when viewed through the Facebook app – where a majority of its users now access the social media platform,” the comments state.  

The definition matters because only “public communications”—TV and radio ads, mass mailers, paid internet ads, and any other form of ‘‘general public political advertising” —are subject to coordination rules  applicable to communication rules and disclaimer requirements.

Paid digital ads that are viewed on a mobile app, rather than viewed on a “web site,” would still constitute ‘‘general public political advertising” and should be covered under existing rules.

Political operatives have taken advantage of the FEC’s dysfunction to push aggressive legal theories exploiting any possible ambiguity in the law, so the FEC’s proposed clarification of its rules is a welcome development.

For example, during the 2016 election cycle, the pro-Clinton super PAC Correct the Record raised huge checks and spent at least $8 million in open coordination with the Clinton campaign. Coordination between candidates and super PACs is strictly limited under federal law, but Correct the Record claimed that its conduct was legal based on an extremely narrow reading of the “public communications” rule and other regulations.

This is a big deal, because although Clinton could only accept checks of up to $2,700 from individuals, Correct the Record could accept unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations and labor unions. By working directly with Correct the Record, Clinton could evade the contribution limits and benefit from million-dollar checks.

CLC filed a complaint against Correct the Record in October, but since the FEC is mired in an ideological standoff, it is unlikely to take action for quite some time.

The FEC correctly recognizes that both technology and political campaigning are evolving and is taking the right step in proposing rules that recognize those changes. 

CLC, Leading Governance Experts Urge the President-elect to Avoid Ongoing Conflicts of Interest and Protect the Integrity of the Presidency

WASHINGTON – The Campaign Legal Center joined today with a bipartisan group of signers, including past Republican and Democratic White House Counsels, in a letter to President-elect Donald Trump calling on him to divest his business enterprises into a true blind trust managed by an independent trustee with no family relationship. Trump will announce his plans regarding his and his family’s financial stake in his business on December 15.

 “Should  President-elect Trump fail to put his business enterprises into a blind trust, his actions would undermine public confidence in decisions he would make as president,” said Trevor Potter, president of the Campaign Legal Center. “Choosing not to separate from these business interests will haunt President-elect Trump throughout his entire presidency. It will distract him and the American people from the important decisions he will need to make about domestic and foreign policies. It will create confusion and undermine his credibility when foreign nations and state-owned companies interact with the Trump Organization, or when the U.S. government undertakes actions that affect Trump business interests overseas.

“Maintaining ownership of the Trump enterprises will create the appearance that President-elect Trump and his family are using the presidency to enrich themselves, even if that is not his intention. The last thing President-elect Trump should ever want is a never-ending battle over the conduct of his personal business affairs.”

The following groups and individuals signed on to the letter:

Ambassador (ret.) Norm Eisen, chief White House ethics lawyer, 2009-2011

Richard Painter, chief White House ethics lawyer, 2005-2007

Campaign for Accountability

Arne H. Carlson, Former Governor of Minnesota (R)

Kathleen Clark, Professor of Law, Washington University, Affiliation noted for identification

purposes only

Center for American Progress

Center for Media and Democracy

Common Cause

CREW

Democracy 21

Former Rep. Mickey Edwards (R-OK), Former Chairman, House Republican Policy Committee Every Voice

Issue One

Thomas Mann

OpenTheGovernment.org

Norm Ornstein

People For the American Way

Trevor Potter, President, Campaign Legal Center

Project On Government Oversight (POGO)

Public Citizen

John Pudner, Executive Director, Take Back Our Republic

The Rootstrikers Project at Demand Progress

Former Rep. Claudine Schneider (R-RI) 4
Former Rep. John J.H. Schwarz, M.D. (R-MI)

Peter Schweizer, President, Government Accountability Institute

Former Rep. Peter Smith (R-VT)

Sunlight Foundation

Laurence H. Tribe, Carl M. Loeb University Professor and Professor of Constitutional Law,

Harvard Law School, Affiliation noted for identification purposes only

Christie Whitman, Former Governor of New Jersey (R)

Pattern emerges of Mercer-backed entities compensating Bannon through use of ‘front groups’ 

Today, The Campaign Legal Center presented new evidence to the Federal Election Commission alleging that the super PAC Make America Number 1 illegally compensated Steve Bannon’s work as Donald Trump’s campaign CEO. Make America Number 1 is largely funded by hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer and chaired by Rebekah Mercer, who is now on Trump’s transition team.

After Bannon joined Trump’s campaign in August, the Mercer-backed Make America Number 1 paid nearly $280,000 to “Glittering Steel LLC,” a production company described as “a front for Bannon” which is located at the same address as Bannon’s consulting firm. During that same period the Trump campaign reported no payments to Bannon.

“The evidence suggests a Mercer-backed super PAC secretly subsidized Steve Bannon’s work for the Trump campaign by funneling $280,000 in payments to a firm described as a ‘front’ for Bannon,” said Brendan Fischer, associate counsel at the Campaign Legal Center.  

Additionally, Make America Number 1 paid at least $4,633,876 to Cambridge Analytica, a data analytics firm incorporated at the same address as Bannon’s consulting firm whose board includes both Bannon and Robert Mercer. Trump also contracted with Cambridge Analytica, indicating that Make America Number 1 ran afoul of the “common vendor” rule designed to preserve the independence of campaigns and political committees. The Trump campaign began contracting with Cambridge Analytica at the request of the Mercer family.

“Once Bannon was taken on as CEO of Trump’s campaign and continued to be paid by Mercer’s entities, this became an issue,” said Larry Noble, general counsel at the Campaign Legal center. “It is especially concerning now that Bannon is White House chief strategist. Bannon’s compensation shows the pervasive influence of the Mercer family of donors in the Trump orbit.”

The letter is a follow-up to the complaint filed by CLC on Oct. 6. That complaint described the significant overlap between Make America Number 1 and the Trump campaign. The Chair of Make America Number 1, Rebekah Mercer, requested that Trump hire Bannon as his campaign CEO, and two former presidents of the super PAC became Trump’s campaign manager and deputy campaign manager, reportedly at Mercer’s suggestions.

CLC also filed complaints against super PACs supporting Trump’s Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.