Austin, TX – A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Texas Secretary of State to release records about a state program that claims to identify non-U.S. citizens on the voter rolls, according to court documents. 

In February, Campaign Legal Center (CLC), Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Texas (ACLU Texas), DĒMOS and Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law filed a lawsuit arguing that Texas Secretary of State John B. Scott’s refusal to turn over the records related to his program to remove voters from the rolls based on alleged citizenship status violates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). According to the complaint, the records could shed light on whether Scott is using outdated citizenship data in driver’s license records to purge registered voters and targeting naturalized U.S. citizens who are legitimately registered to vote. In 2021, the groups sent two letters requesting the records under the NVRA but did not receive them. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. 

Following a bench trial in May, U.S. District Court Judge Lee Yeakel ruled that Scott had violated the NVRA and gave him 14 days to turn over the records.

Danielle Lang, senior vice president at Campaign Legal Center, made the following statement in response:

“Our democracy works best when every voter can participate. By refusing to comply with the National Voter Registration Act, Texas stonewalled essential public monitoring that helps ensure elections are free and fair. Naturalized citizens in Texas, and every U.S. state, should not have to worry about being purged from the voting rolls and denied their freedom to vote. Thankfully, Texas will now have to produce records for their discriminatory voter purge program, so we can continue to protect Texans’ freedom to vote and guarantee safe and accessible elections for all.”

The U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration will hold a hearing this morning at 10:30 a.m. ET on the need to update the Electoral Count Act (ECA), an outdated law from 1887 that outlines procedures for casting and counting Electoral College votes in presidential elections. 

Adav Noti, vice president and legal director of CLC, will participate in a press briefing at 3:00 p.m. ET today to discuss the hearing and answer reporters’ question about the ECA. RSVP here to attend.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Trevor Potter, founder and president of Campaign Legal Center and Republican Former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission, issued the following statement ahead of today’s hearing: 

“We thank Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar  and Ranking Member Roy Blunt for holding today’s hearing on the urgent need to update the ECA to protect the will of the people. Our democracy cannot afford another presidential election plagued by the types of challenges we saw following the 2020 election—challenges that stem from the confusing way Congress receives and counts Electoral College votes.
Fortunately, bipartisan legislation has been introduced in the Senate to address the ECA’s most serious vulnerabilities. The Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022 (ECRA) would significantly improve the ECA to reduce opportunities for election sabotage and ensure that elections are decided by voters. While we know that there is still more work to be done to protect our freedom to vote, this bill is nevertheless a step in the right direction and provides critical safeguards for the results of presidential elections. 

“Following this hearing, members of Congress must come together to adopt the strongest possible checks and balances to prevent future attempts by bad actors to manipulate and undermine our presidential elections. We call on Congress, especially Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, to act with the urgency that this moment demands.”  

Background on the ECA:

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 provides the primary legal framework for casting and counting electoral votes. The law is important because it sets a timeline for selecting electors and transmitting their votes to Congress. The ECA also establishes procedures for how Congress counts the electoral votes. However, it has not been updated since it was enacted more than 130 years ago. 

Following the 2020 presidential election, partisan actors attempted to exploit loopholes in the ECA as part of an organized attempt to overturn the results. While efforts to reject state-certified electoral votes and overrule the will of voters were unsuccessful, gaps and ambiguities remain in the ECA and are ripe for manipulation. 

In 2021, CLC convened constitutional experts from across the country and representing all political viewpoints to determine important updates to modernize the ECA. Some of the updates that these experts felt were necessary are included in the ECRA, a bill introduced by Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), along with 14 cosponsors, last month:  

• Prohibiting state legislatures from overruling their own voters. 
• Resolving disputes about electors and electoral votes before they reach Congress. 
• Strictly limiting opportunities for members of Congress to second guess electors and electoral votes. 
• Clarifying the vice president’s ministerial role in the counting of electoral votes. 

A poll commissioned by Campaign Legal Center last year showed strong, bipartisan support among voters for updating the ECA. It also highlighted the serious concern held by a majority of voters (58%) that one party in Congress could try to overturn the results of an upcoming presidential election to put their own candidate in power.  
 

Despite earning at least $114 million in fee-based revenue, the political fundraising conduit has reported spending less than $2,700 on operating expenditures. The complaint alleges that WinRed has violated campaign finance laws by not completely and accurately reporting its expenses.

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleging that WinRed, a major fundraising conduit for candidates and committees affiliated with the Republican Party, has violated federal campaign finance laws by not completely and accurately reporting its operating expenditures.

Since being organized in January of 2019, WinRed has processed over $2.8 billion in earmarked contributions, earning at least $114 million in fee-based revenue by conservative estimates. Despite this sizable haul, WinRed has reported spending less than $2,700 on operating expenditures during this period, along with just $243,000 in “debt” to an affiliated company, WinRed Technical Services, for unpaid legal, consulting and insurance fees.

This reporting suggests that WinRed is either failing to report its operating expenditures or is failing to report “in-kind” contributions in the form of free goods and services.

“Voters have a right to know how political fundraising conduits like WinRed spend their money, so they can make an informed choice as to whether to support candidates and committees that use its service,” said Saurav Ghosh, director of federal reform at Campaign Legal Center. “As it stands now, all of us – from donors giving through WinRed, to the candidates who use its services, to those of us trying to follow the money – are in the dark about how WinRed operates. The FEC needs to investigate and set the record straight.”

WinRed is one of the the largest financial operations in our election system – offering a wide range of fundraising services to political candidates and committees. Yet it is currently concealing from the public how it is using the funds it earns from processing contributions, including who is providing the goods and services that allow WinRed to conduct its extensive operations, and how much WinRed is paying for those goods and services.

Transparency regarding the money raised and spent to influence our election system is essential to an open and inclusive democracy. The FEC must investigate WinRed. 

At Campaign Legal Center, we are advancing democracy through law. Learn more about our work.