CREW files IG complaints over Trump’s $10B lawsuit against the IRS and Treasury - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Agency inspectors general must investigate the risks posed by Trump’s unprecedented $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS and the Treasury.

NEW: The Treasury, IRS and DOJ Offices of Inspector General must investigate the potential conflicts of interest and constitutional violations posed by President Trump's unprecedented $10 billion lawsuit. So we just filed a complaint.

CREW complaint: Investigate Kash Patel’s Olympics trip - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington The DOJ Inspector General should investigate FBI Director Kash Patel for potentially violating federal travel and conduct rules.

New @citizensforethics.org complaint calls on the Department of Justice Inspector General to investigate Kash Patel's trip to the Olympics: www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action...

Trump's properties remain an epicenter of his conflicts and corruption in second term - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington In his first 365 days back in office, Trump visited his properties 198 times, and visited his golf courses 116 times.

NEW: President Trump’s first year of his second term was reportedly “the most lucrative year of his life.”

His profiteering during his first term already made him the most corrupt president in history—but last year it got even worse. 🧵

President Trump sued the IRS and Treasury Department for $10 billion—yes, that’s billion with a “B”—claiming that the agencies failed to protect his tax information.

Here’s what that actually means. 🧵

CREW Gets Preliminary Injunction to Require DOJ to Turn Over Information on Its Attempt to Collect Voter Registration Information from the States #ELB Opinion from Judge Kollar-Kotelly: In this Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) case, Plaintiff Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (“CREW”) seeks information about an allegedly widesp...

CREW Gets Preliminary Injunction to Require DOJ to Turn Over Information on Its Attempt to Collect Voter Registration Information from the States electionlawblog.org?p=154439

Trump is suing the IRS for $10 billion. Here’s what that actually means. - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Trump’s $10 billion cash grab from the IRS is an ethical disaster that would likely make him dramatically wealthier.

NEW: Trump is suing the IRS for $10 billion dollars. Here's what that means: The president is suing an agency he oversees for an amount that would roughly double his net worth. That's outrageous.

A Jan. 6 rioter pardoned by Trump was convicted of sexually abusing children A handyman from Florida who received a pardon from President Trump for storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was convicted on state charges of child sex abuse and exposing himself to a child.

A handyman from Florida who received a pardon from President Trump for storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was convicted on state charges of child sex abuse and exposing himself to a child. n.pr/4tx7oVq

Man pardoned in U.S. Capitol riot pleads guilty to threatening Hakeem Jeffries A New York man has pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor harassment charge in connection with a death threat aimed at U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries

A man pardoned by Donald Trump for January 6th just pled guilty to a new crime--threatening Hakeem Jeffries. abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory...

FEC Commissioner Trey Trainor must recuse from complaint against Bragg and Biden-Harris - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Trainor's demonstrated support for former president Donald Trump’s candidacy and bias against the respondents has disqualified him from participating in this matter.

Trainor’s confession of bias isn’t surprising - CREW asked him to recuse based on it - but he refused. Giving political hacks veto power over campaign finance enforcement is unsustainable. www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action...

Quiet Part Out Loud Dep't: Trey Trainor Says He "Fought for" Trump "Every Single Day Throughout the Biden Presidency" When He Was an FEC Commissioner #ELB Just wow:

Quiet Part Out Loud Dep’t: Trey Trainor Says He “Fought for” Trump “Every Single Day Throughout the Biden Presidency” When He Was an FEC Commissioner electionlawblog.org?p=154162

FEC Commissioner Trey Trainor must recuse from complaint against Bragg and Biden-Harris - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Trainor's demonstrated support for former president Donald Trump’s candidacy and bias against the respondents has disqualified him from participating in this matter.

Trainor’s confession of bias isn’t surprising - CREW asked him to recuse based on it - but he refused. Giving political hacks veto power over campaign finance enforcement is unsustainable.

www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action...

Buckley's legacy at 50 is quickly turning from its ipse dixit that "money is speech" into "money is the only speech"

Its defenders nevertheless hail the decision as guarding everyone's first amendment rights. But in the 50 years since it came down, we have seen a degrading of the free speech rights of anyone who doesn't "speak" through their wallet.

Remembering Buckley's mistakes - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington “Money is speech” our current campaign finance jurisprudence tells us. And while many consider the 2010 decision of Citizens United v. FEC as the source of that edict, it is actually much older.

Buckley ignored the operative question--could we regulate corruption even if some corrupt payments were later turned into speech--to ask a straw man: could government ban speech merely because money were spent on it. www.citizensforethics.org/reports-inve...

The First Amendment turned upside down: Buckley at 50 - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington 50 years ago, the Supreme Court concluded that money equaled speech. Since then, campaign contributions have taken privilege over speech.

ICYMI, last Friday was the 50th anniversary of Buckley v. Valeo - the case that declared money is speech and set the ground for Citizens United. Like Citizens United, it was wrong when decided. www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysi...

Remembering Buckley's mistakes - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington “Money is speech” our current campaign finance jurisprudence tells us. And while many consider the 2010 decision of Citizens United v. FEC as the source of that edict, it is actually much older.

Buckley was erroneous when first decided and is worth revisiting. www.citizensforethics.org/reports-inve...

Rather, the question is does the First Amendment protect a transfer of funds simply because those funds may be spent on speech, even if the regulation targets an evil entirely unrelated to the speech.

Buckley's premise that money is speech is anti-constitutional. Its born of a false syllogism: that if the government can't restrain speech, it can't restrain speech just because $ is spent on it. But that was never the question.

In the name of the First Amendment, dark money seeks to censor free speech - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Twelve years after Citizens United v. FEC, dark money groups are mounting legal challenges to hide campaign spending from public scrutiny.

And Buckley is now being used to censor actual speech. Big money donors are arguing that criticism of their actions is chilling their donations - so they're using Buckley to ask courts to enjoin discussion about their contributions. www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysi...

The divergence is born from the false equivalency at Buckley's heart. Speech works, if at all, by persuading. Big money doesn't have to persuade anyone at all. It buys influence well before and quite apart from any communication it funds, indeed even if its never spent on speech at all.

Buckley v. Valeo and its progeny may have safeguarded the rights of millionaires and billionaires to buy influence but its done nothing to protect the free speech of anyone else.

The First Amendment turned upside down: Buckley at 50 - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington 50 years ago, the Supreme Court concluded that money equaled speech. Since then, campaign contributions have taken privilege over speech.

50 years ago today the Court decided that money is speech. Defenders claim the Court saved democracy and safeguarded free speech, but in line with its true effect, its fitting its 50th is marked by the blatantly unconstitutional arrest of a journalist.
www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysi...

The spending of election funds by corporations, however, generates unique harms that have nothing to do with whether those corporations' speech is persuasive. The use of corporations led to an explosion of dark money groups and shell entities that can hide and launder funds usable as bribes.

Unlike the corporations restrained before Citizens United, nothing about these speakers' identities generates an impact distinct from the effectiveness of their speech. A speaker's nationality may lend credibility or distinction to their perspective, but that simply impacts their persuasiveness.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio Remarks to the Press - United States Department of State QUESTION:  Can I ask a non-trip question, because I want to know what’s happening with this Ukrainian children grant. SECRETARY RUBIO:  Grant? QUESTION:  The Ukrainian children who — SECRETARY RUBIO: ...

Yet everyday we see speech censored and speakers hunted solely because of who they are and what they said. www.state.gov/secretary-of...; www.cnn.com/2025/04/14/u...; www.cnn.com/2025/03/10/u...; www.npr.org/2025/05/09/n...

Today marks the 16th anniversary of Citizens United - a decision responsible for flooding our elections with billions in dark money and putting national policy up for auction. We were told the 1A commanded this because it did not permit distinction between speakers....

New paper w/ Kulesza & @cmwitko.bsky.social

A worry about campaign contribution limits is that they don't stop money, they just shift it to Citizens United/SpeechNow "independent expenditures"

We find that this didn't happen. Keep calm & regulate on

www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nk11m...

1/n

Court found it wasn't a riot - riots are uncoordinated and lack a unity of purpose. January 6 was a concerted attack to prevent a transfer of power: an insurrection.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court rescued President Trump from Section 3. The errors with that decision are profound: but even it didn't call into question Colorado's factual findings. And the Supreme Court effectively affirmed then when it affirmed Mr. Griffin's disqualification under Section 3.

Of course, Colorado didn't have before it Trump's yet-to-be pardons of his co-belligerents, or his subsequent attempts to rewrite history, all of which further confirm his support for and intentions to incite a violent attack that day to overthrow the elected president.