Trump made far more money in his first year in back in office than he has ever made IN HIS LIFE, and it was completely, undeniably intentional. We showed in a recent report that when Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee in 2024, he began a spree of corporate formation that continues to this day
JD Vance: "I've not seen a single shred of evidence that Donald Trump participates or sanctions in that corruption ... I've not once seen evidence that Donald Trump has enriched himself"
BREAKING: We just sued Jared Kushner for unlawfully acting as one of the country's top diplomats without undergoing Senate confirmation or filing financial disclosures.
It’s abundantly clear that he should be blocked from performing this outsized role: www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action...
the excuse? "nor do we have authority over ads produced by any third-party PAC that we contribute to in Arizona"
Except you do, big donor. You can't just hand off a bag of cash (and claim the 1A right to do so without limit because it funds speech) & then wash your hands of that speech.
#ELB: “Airbnb Disavows Anti-Trans Ad From Republican Super PAC It Supported” https://electionlawblog.org/2026/airbnb-disavows-anti-trans-ad-from-republican-super-pac-it-supported/
And if Airbnb didn't control the ads and, it appears, didn't care what the ads it was funding would say - why is it funding a super PAC? If its not to fund ads like this, then what, pray tell, did Airbnb think it was buying with its $$$?
Trump may now be paying for his campaign ads with maga inc funds rather than taxpayer funds, but it’s still illegal. Office holders can’t direct super PAC spending.
COURT WIN: In 2024, we sued on behalf of 2 GA voters over $5 million in spending on Senate races that was routed through multiple groups to hide its source. The FEC had split along partisan lines, with 3 commissioners improperly raising the bar and declining to investigate.
Good News: The 9th Circuit upheld an Arizona law created to combat corrupt elections and strengthen the state’s disclosure rules. In 2024, we filed an amicus brief in support of it.
State laws can help close federal loopholes and bring real transparency to state elections.
BREAKING: In a victory for voters, a federal appeals court upheld Arizona's Prop 211, the landmark voter-approved law that reveals the original sources of dark money election spending. Campaign Legal Center Action represents Voters’ Right to Know in this case.
NEW - 9th Circuit upholds Arizona's anti-dark money initiative. Importantly, holds voters right to know doesn't end with the immediate funder of the ad, but goes back to the donor behind it - the person likely to buy influence. cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op...
@citizensforethics.org filed an amicus in support of the law, pointing to the inadequacies in alternative tracing methods like requiring recipients to self-report donors' subjective motives to influence elections. www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/u...
@citizensforethics.org also noted that the plaintiffs' requested relief - effectively a judicial ban on criticizing them, their donors, or their benefiting officials over the sources of their support - violates American's First Amendment rights.
NEW: ProPublica revealed that the FBI was circling Sen. Collins over a defense contractor’s donations — until Trump gutted the unit in charge.
Collins has since mustered a defense with a series of incorrect and misleading claims.
Must read piece in Pro Publica on the reality of today’s campaign finance system that shows the false promises SCOTUS made that got us here. 🧵https://www.propublica.org/article/fbi-susan-collins-navatek-campaign-donations-investigation
A quid pro quo, or just "access and influence" donors earn? SCOTUS tells us only the former is problematic. But millions in taxpayer funds may have been misallocated, reflecting neither merit nor popular will, but solely a kick back of campaign contributions. Either way, taxpayers get bilked.
Must read piece in Pro Publica on the reality of today’s campaign finance system that shows the false promises SCOTUS made that got us here. 🧵https://www.propublica.org/article/fbi-susan-collins-navatek-campaign-donations-investigation
“Vigilant enforcement,” SCOTUS just told us this summer, is the best means to prevent wrongdoing. But that ignores the reality – unlike observable and verifiable metrics like contribution limits, quid pro quos aren’t done in the open for people to see.
And if we rely on government agencies for enforcement, they are the same people who may either be corrupted themselves or are serving people that are corrupted. The FBI was apparently waived off this investigation by those in power.
Must read piece in Pro Publica on the reality of today’s campaign finance system that shows the false promises SCOTUS made that got us here. 🧵https://www.propublica.org/article/fbi-susan-collins-navatek-campaign-donations-investigation
We’re often given a false choice: anonymous political activity or full public disclosure. But large contributions are rarely, if ever, anonymous. Donors want influence (or bribes) for their money, which requires officials to know who they are. The donors are only “anonymous” to the voting public.
Must read piece in Pro Publica on the reality of today’s campaign finance system that shows the false promises SCOTUS made that got us here. 🧵https://www.propublica.org/article/fbi-susan-collins-navatek-campaign-donations-investigation
The contractor's money went to a super PAC – a group that is supposedly independent of candidates. When SCOTUS (with help of the DC Circuit) unleashed super PACs, they assured us this independence meant there was no significant risk that contributions to super PACs would result in bribes.
But the super PAC was in fact closely associated with Senator Collins and made sure she knew who was donating, even if the public didn't. The donor clearly understood it was important Senator Collins knew they were behind this supposedly low-value contribution.
Must read piece in Pro Publica on the reality of today’s campaign finance system that shows the false promises SCOTUS made that got us here. 🧵https://www.propublica.org/article/fbi-susan-collins-navatek-campaign-donations-investigation
Pro Publica reports that a military-contractor – someone the law forbids from electioneering—engaged in a multi-million dollar bribery scheme with members of congress in exchange for government contracts. Though counterparties deny involvement, the reporting is still revealing.
Since Trump’s pardons, insurrectionists have sought offices from town clerk and school board all the way up to governorships and congressional seats—but voters across the country are overwhelmingly rejecting them. 🧵
Conditioning funding based on a recipient’s support or opposition to a particular political candidate or party is a violation of the Hatch Act.
The Office of Special Counsel must investigate the Trump admin's "partisan punishment of American citizens."
Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee on March 12, 2024, and within days, he started creating new companies and slapping his name on products.
He hasn't stopped since. The tally now stands at 81 new businesses—36 since taking office (he started two more while I was drafting this report)
One year ago, I started highlighting the growing number of enforcement matters that the FEC cannot resolve until we regain a quorum. Last year, there were 154. Now, it’s doubled to 307. We need a quorum to tackle this backlog and fully achieve the agency’s mission this election.
So Meta is donating $5 million to dark money groups for both the R and D sides of the house and senate. But I've been assured by SCOTUS that donors only contribute to these groups to fund speech they support....
NEW: Trump reported bringing in over $2.2 billion in revenue during 2025. More than a third of that revenue came from dozens of companies Trump had just incorporated months before. The data makes clear Trump’s intention to capitalize on the presidency like *never* before.
👀 More examples of big super PAC contribs buying access to POTUS.
By @issueonereform.bsky.social's count, these will be at least the 13th and 14th big money super PAC fundraising events President Trump will have attended since he was elected in Nov 2024.
h/t @cbsnews.com@gabekaminsky.bsky.social
Massive political spending is an avenue for the sort of undue influence that most American voters view as corrupt. Restoring confidence in government will require major reforms to address the concentration of private wealth and public power.
NEW: Trump's second term has taken corruption to an entirely new level—expanding the ways he can profit from the presidency, reward allies and use the power of his office for personal gain.
Here are 10 ways Trump's second term is even more corrupt than his first.
But I've been assured that all the court decisions during that time striking down campaign finance laws have been expanding free speech rights (if you're rich enough to afford them of course)?
Most Americans think the freedom of speech is eroding (hard to disagree with that) and, more disturbing still, that it will continue to erode over the next decade.
BREAKING: We just sued the Treasury Department for illegally withholding information about who is receiving settlement money from its Judgement Fund.
Taxpayers need to know whether Jan. 6ers and Trump allies are getting massive payouts from the federal government.
NEW: The Jan. 6 insurrection left American taxpayers with $2.7 billion in costs that were never recovered. Now, convicted Jan. 6 defendants are trying to use the Federal Tort Claims Act to extract substantial and secretive payouts from the government.
We helped secure a big win for Arizona voters! The Arizona Supreme Court upheld Prop 211, the voter-approved law that reveals the original sources of money spent in elections and protects voters’ right to know who is spending big money to influence their vote. 1/3
BREAKING: We filed for a temporary restraining order to block the transfer of $1.8B from the Treasury Dept to Trump's slush fund.
Trump can't unilaterally and secretly disburse these taxpayer funds. The court must stop this grift before it's too late. www.citizensforethics.org/news/press-r...
BREAKING: We sued the DOJ, Treasury Department and IRS to block the Trump admin from handing out $1.8 billion in taxpayer funds to Trump's allies who claim to be victims of government weaponization.
This settlement is one of the single most corrupt acts in American history.
NEW: CLC and @citizensforethics.org are suing the FEC to stop a loophole that permits outside groups — like Elon Musk’s super PAC in 2024 — to coordinate with candidates and spend millions of dollars on canvassing.
BREAKING: We, alongside @campaignlegal.org, sued the FEC over its advisory opinion allowing wealthy donors and special interests to spend millions in coordination with candidates—while hiding who may be spending big to influence votes.
The court must reject this illegal opinion.
Fascinating deep dive into backroom deals and double dealing that led to perhaps the most consequential campaign finance case that put up elections up for sale.
www.nytimes.com/2026/05/06/u...
Buckley’s advocates claimed “money is speech.” That gets the 1A backwards. Every human act is speech; every act expresses intents and opinions. The 1A doesn’t immunise them all. It blocks govt attempts to limit info, not attempts to stop other evils.
www.citizensforethics.org/reports-inve...
NEW: We just submitted an amicus brief urging the court to reject the National Park Service's effort to remove an exhibit about freedom and slavery from Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia.
Read more: