Abuse of Power

Tonight, Common Cause filed motions for expedited review and summary judgment in its challenge to President Trump’s memorandum requiring the exclusion of undocumented people from being counted in the congressional apportionment base following the 2020 census.  Should the court find summary judgment unavailable, Common Cause moved in the alternative for an expedited trial on the merits. The motions filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Common Cause v. Trump urge the court to expedite proceedings so that a final judgment and appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court can be completed before January  2021, when the President is scheduled to send apportionment numbers to Congress. 

“The drastic and disruptive changes to the Postal Service by the Trump administration have been an attack on every American’s right to vote and their First Amendment right to free speech – and they must be rolled back definitively with more than just a press release,” said Karen Hobert Flynn, President of Common Cause.

The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and its pro bono counsel, Arnold & Porter LLP, filed suit this evening in federal court for the District of Maryland on behalf of the National Urban League, Common Cause and the League of Women Voters U.S. against Postmaster General Louis DeJoy and the United States Postal Service, challenging actions intended to disrupt the 2020 election by making it more difficult for mail ballots to be delivered on time.

It is time for a unified call from all stakeholders to ensure elected officials meet this demand for safe, accessible voting. We certainly need to hear the powerful voice of America’s business community.  U.S. corporations, after all, have a strong stake in maintaining America’s long history of political stability — truly at risk this year — because it guarantees the business climate which has made ours the world’s largest economy. Wealthy corporations, who can afford to pour seemingly limitless sums into the electoral process, have long had an inside advantage when it comes to influencing Congress.

This week Forbes broke the story that Jared Kushner, “de facto chief” of President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign, has been speaking “regularly,” “almost daily,” with Kanye West since West’s July 4 tweet declaring that he is running for president. “Regular” conversations between the head of one presidential campaign and an opposing candidate looks like coordination and is highly irregular. Depending on what they’re talking about, they may be breaking campaign finance laws.

The first potential issue, according to Paul S. Ryan of the watchdog group Common Cause, is if Kushner encouraged West to do something proactive that could benefit Trump’s campaign, such as running for office. If Kushner solicited from West what could be valued at more than the legal limit of $2,800, it could be considered an in-kind contribution to the Trump campaign. And, given the expense of running campaigns, it seems likely if not guaranteed that West running for office — and expending much more than $2,800 — would violate that law. The second issue is if they coordinated about the campaign — i.e., if Kushner encouraged West to do something specific when it comes to launching or running a campaign. “Any expenditure made by Kanye West in cooperation, consultation or concert with — or at the request or suggestion of — Kushner, an agent of the Trump campaign, would be considered an in-kind contribution from the Kanye West campaign to the Trump campaign,” Ryan said.