In 2011, Galveston County passed maps for the Commissioners Court and Justices of the Peace Court which diminished the ability of Black and Latino voters to elect candidates for those offices. The county redrew the maps so that almost no district could elect a candidate of choice of Black and Latino voters. The Department of Justice objected to the maps under the preclearance process of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965, and the county was forced to reconsider their discriminatory maps. After the U.S. Supreme Court held that the preclearance process no longer applied in Shelby County v. Holder in 2013, however, the county passed a more discriminatory map for the justices of the peace. As a result, in 2013, several Galveston County residents filed a lawsuit against the county adopting a justices of the peace map that discriminated against Black and Latino voters.

The 2020 Census revealed significant population growth among Black and Latino residents in Galveston County. Accordingly, the county redrew the maps for the Commissioners Court to ensure that Black and Latino voters would not be able to elect a representative for the Commissioners Court in any of the districts. Furthermore, the new map adopted by the county virtually ensures the electoral defeat of the sole candidate of choice for Black and Latino voters who currently sits on the Commissioners Court. The county adopted this map with the intent of discriminating against Black and Latino voters to ensure that they would not have a voice in county government. Finally, the county chose not to change the already-discriminatory map for the Justices of the Peace Court for which they are currently being sued.

The county’s actions represent a larger pattern of local governments which are engaging in discriminatory redistricting processes after the 2020 Census. The 2020 Census marked the first redistricting cycle in 50 years in which the full VRA is no longer in effect. Accordingly, local governments that formerly had to submit their redistricting plans to the federal government under preclearance — including Galveston County — are no longer subject to federal oversight after the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder. These counties have a history of discrimination against voters of color and are now reengaging in discriminatory redistricting practices with impunity.

In 2021, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) joined the ongoing lawsuit, first filed in 2013, to represent Galveston County voters against the ongoing racial discrimination by Galveston County. These voters live in Commissioners Court and Justices of the Peace Court districts which were intentionally drawn to deprive them of the equal opportunity to elect their candidates of choice.

CLC filed a supplemental complaint on behalf of the voters to challenge the ongoing discrimination which occurred after the 2020 Census, in violation of the VRA and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.

In August 2018, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed an administrative complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) demonstrating that a dark money group called 45Committee, Inc. (45Committee) violated federal campaign finance law by failing to register as a political committee and disclose its donors. 

45Committee, which is named for the campaign to elect the 45th President of the United States, was created in 2015 for the purpose of airing advertisements opposing then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. After the Republican Party nominated Donald J. Trump in 2016, however, 45Committee was taken over by TD Ameritrade heir Todd Ricketts for the purpose of operating as a “nondisclosing vehicle” for Republican donors who found publicly supporting Trump “embarrassing.”  

To provide a “nondisclosing vehicle,” and defying federal laws requiring it to do so, 45Committee opted not to register as a PAC, which would have required it to disclose its contributors. Instead, in the five weeks leading up to the 2016 election, 45Committee spent as much as $38 million supporting the election of Trump and opposing Clinton. During this time, the group ran over 5,000 ads to this effect—more than the Republican National Committee itself. All the while, 45Committee refused to disclose its donors, leaving the American public in the dark about who was taking such drastic measures to influence the 2016 election. 

After waiting over a year-and-a-half for the FEC to act on its administrative complaint, CLC sued. Following the procedure outlined in the Federal Election Campaign Act, CLC filed suit against the FEC itself for failing to enforce federal transparency laws. In November 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia deemed the FEC’s inaction “contrary to law” and ordered the FEC to act on CLC’s complaint within 30 days. The FEC failed to do so. Given the FEC’s inaction, the court then authorized CLC to file suit against 45Committee directly for its violations of federal campaign finance law. 

What's at Stake? 

Transparency around who is spending money to support or oppose candidates for federal office is a cornerstone of our democracy. Under federal law, organizations that exist predominantly to engage in political activity—including spending money on political advertising to support their preferred candidate—are required to register as political committees (PACs) with the FEC and report their donors, along with other information about their financial resources. 

In the administrative complaint filed with the FEC in 2018, CLC demonstrated that 45Committee’s major purpose—as evidenced by its name, political spending in 2016, fundraising appeals and public statements—was to support the election of its preferred candidates—namely Donald Trump. Nonetheless, 45Committee never registered as a political committee and never filed the required reports disclosing its contributors, expenditures or debts and obligations. 

By allowing organizations like 45Committee to evade federal law and leave the public in the dark about who is spending money to influence elections without repercussion, the FEC undermines public trust in our elections. The lack of enforcement and lack of any consequence for illegal behavior encourages 45Committee and others who seek to emulate 45Committee’s activities to continue to violate campaign finance law. 

In order to ensure transparency and accountability in federal elections, violations like those uncovered by CLC here must be investigated and acted upon to ensure the public knows which interests are supporting or opposing candidates in future elections. 

Public officials at all levels of government are responsible for crafting, administering and enforcing laws that impact the lives of those they serve. For more than 50 years, ethics commissions have served a vital role in democracy by upholding transparency principles and administering various laws and rules intended to preserve the public’s trust in government.

At their best, ethics laws and rules at the state and local level help increase transparency and hold those in public service accountable when they undermine the public’s trust and fail to behave ethically. When public officials are well-informed of the laws that govern their public service and when the public has full access to information about their public officials, government can be held accountable, and the public’s trust grows.

However, over time, gaps and loopholes in ethics laws can be exposed, revealing vulnerabilities in a government’s transparency and accountability measures. Often, it is a team effort to brainstorm, develop, vet and implement more effective rules when the ones on the books become outdated or are no longer working as intended.

CLC provides well-researched and tested ethics solutions to meet a community’s needs. Our guidance helps ensure that local reform measures are effective and will stand up in the courts.

Nearly 200 years ago, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Henry Clay stated that “Government is a trust, and the officers of the government are trustees; and both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the People." To fulfill this trust, ethics laws and rules exist to provide transparency and accountability. The laws are intended to have members of Congress use the power of their offices for the benefit of the people, not their own personal or financial gain.

Members of Congress are incredibly powerful, yet vulnerable, public servants whose work directly impacts the lives of all Americans. As they draft laws, conduct oversight hearings and establish legislative priorities in committees, members of Congress gain access to invaluable information and are subject to endless attempts to influence their decisions. The ethics rules of both the House and the Senate are expected to provide guardrails to prevent corruption, but it is the public that is frequently responsible for calling for enforcement of existing rules and proposing more effective rules when those on the books are not working.

CLC works to reduce corruption and increase integrity by holding members of Congress accountable to the laws and rules already on the books and ensuring that new laws and rules do not decrease transparency or allow members of Congress to evade accountability.

To maintain a government of, by and for the people, the president, appointees and other executive branch officials must use their power to benefit the people, not themselves through personal or financial gain.

Executive branch officials hold many of the highest positions in government, and they make decisions that affect the daily lives of members of the public as they implement and enforce the laws Congress passes and the president signs. As a result of their power, officials are constant targets of wealthy special interests with outsized influence with the means to sway officials or receive information that would provide them with an opportunity to financially benefit at the public’s expense.

Ethics rules and laws are an important and effective way to make sure the people are put first. These laws provide transparency, accountability and guardrails that prevent members of the executive branch from abusing power.

The current laws require constant vigilance from the public and watchdog groups like CLC to determine whether an official has violated the law. Unfortunately, when officials act unethically, the law may not prohibit their behavior.

That is why CLC works to enforce and strengthen ethics laws that apply to the executive branch while fighting to make sure that Congress does not pass laws that would decrease transparency or help executive branch officials evade accountability.