"Based on this ruling," said CREW's Noah Bookbinder, "the public should know a whole lot more about who is giving money for the purpose of influencing an election, and it will be much harder for donors to anonymously contribute to groups that advertise in elections." (Photo: Stephen Melkisethian/flickr/cc)
'Major Victory': Federal Judge Issues Game-Changing Ruling on Dark Money
The ruling is poised "to bring much more transparency to our elections"
An ethics watchdog has claimed a "major court victory" after a federal judge issued a ruling invalidating a Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulation that allowed contributors to so-called dark money organizations avoid disclosure.
"This ruling looks like a major game changer," said Noah Bookbinder, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). "Based on this ruling, the public should know a whole lot more about who is giving money for the purpose of influencing an election, and it will be much harder for donors to anonymously contribute to groups that advertise in elections."
\u201cBREAKING: We just won a major victory against dark money that could change the political landscape and bring much more transparency to our elections https://t.co/wWwar2zRZb\u201d— Citizens for Ethics (@Citizens for Ethics) 1533399508
CREW was a plaintiff in the case, and had challenged in 2012 Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS--a "not-political committee"--over its failure to disclose who donated $6 million in the Ohio Senate race, a sum CREW argued was subject to federal reporting requirements.
U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell found that Crossroads GPS's defense didn't hold water, writing Friday that the three-decade old FEC regulation at question fell short "of the broad disclosure that Congress intended."
The challenged regulation, she concluded, can facilitate groups' "routing" of contributions to candidates or the groups' affiliated super PACS, and
blatantly undercuts the congressional goal of fully disclosing the sources of money flowing into federal political campaigns, and thereby suppresses the benefits intended to accrue from disclosure, including informing the electorate, deterring corruption, and enforcing bans on foreign contributions being used to buy access and influence to American political officials.
Her decision, CREW explains, means that "dark money groups that spend at least $250 in independent expenditures--a key type of political ad--must report every contributor who gave at least $200 in the past year as well as those who give to finance independent expenditures generally."
In a Twitter thread outlining the importance of ruling, Center for Responsive Politics' Robert Maguire says it "could fundamentally change the role dark money plays in elections (if it has a role at all)."
\u201cThis. Is. Huge. \n\nIt's hard to exaggerate how big of a deal this @CREWcrew victory is. If it stands, it could fundamentally change the role dark money plays in elections (if it has a role at all).\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
\u201cDark money groups will still benefit from certain loopholes that, honestly, might never be closed, like the "issue ad" one we mentioned yesterday https://t.co/X6m6ogyDGg\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
\u201cBUT, that is not at all to downplay the importance of the decision. \n\nConsider that dark money groups have spent more than $733 MILLION (!) on independent expenditures -- the type of spending the case was concerned with -- since Citizens United.\n\nA huge portion of their activity.\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
Bookbinder agreed, saying it "could dramatically change the American political landscape and result in significantly more transparency."
"Major donors are now on notice that if they contribute to politically active 501(c)(4) organizations, their contributions will have to be disclosed," he said, "and if they are not, CREW will pursue enforcement cases with the FEC and, if necessary, in court."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just days away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
An ethics watchdog has claimed a "major court victory" after a federal judge issued a ruling invalidating a Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulation that allowed contributors to so-called dark money organizations avoid disclosure.
"This ruling looks like a major game changer," said Noah Bookbinder, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). "Based on this ruling, the public should know a whole lot more about who is giving money for the purpose of influencing an election, and it will be much harder for donors to anonymously contribute to groups that advertise in elections."
\u201cBREAKING: We just won a major victory against dark money that could change the political landscape and bring much more transparency to our elections https://t.co/wWwar2zRZb\u201d— Citizens for Ethics (@Citizens for Ethics) 1533399508
CREW was a plaintiff in the case, and had challenged in 2012 Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS--a "not-political committee"--over its failure to disclose who donated $6 million in the Ohio Senate race, a sum CREW argued was subject to federal reporting requirements.
U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell found that Crossroads GPS's defense didn't hold water, writing Friday that the three-decade old FEC regulation at question fell short "of the broad disclosure that Congress intended."
The challenged regulation, she concluded, can facilitate groups' "routing" of contributions to candidates or the groups' affiliated super PACS, and
blatantly undercuts the congressional goal of fully disclosing the sources of money flowing into federal political campaigns, and thereby suppresses the benefits intended to accrue from disclosure, including informing the electorate, deterring corruption, and enforcing bans on foreign contributions being used to buy access and influence to American political officials.
Her decision, CREW explains, means that "dark money groups that spend at least $250 in independent expenditures--a key type of political ad--must report every contributor who gave at least $200 in the past year as well as those who give to finance independent expenditures generally."
In a Twitter thread outlining the importance of ruling, Center for Responsive Politics' Robert Maguire says it "could fundamentally change the role dark money plays in elections (if it has a role at all)."
\u201cThis. Is. Huge. \n\nIt's hard to exaggerate how big of a deal this @CREWcrew victory is. If it stands, it could fundamentally change the role dark money plays in elections (if it has a role at all).\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
\u201cDark money groups will still benefit from certain loopholes that, honestly, might never be closed, like the "issue ad" one we mentioned yesterday https://t.co/X6m6ogyDGg\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
\u201cBUT, that is not at all to downplay the importance of the decision. \n\nConsider that dark money groups have spent more than $733 MILLION (!) on independent expenditures -- the type of spending the case was concerned with -- since Citizens United.\n\nA huge portion of their activity.\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
Bookbinder agreed, saying it "could dramatically change the American political landscape and result in significantly more transparency."
"Major donors are now on notice that if they contribute to politically active 501(c)(4) organizations, their contributions will have to be disclosed," he said, "and if they are not, CREW will pursue enforcement cases with the FEC and, if necessary, in court."
An ethics watchdog has claimed a "major court victory" after a federal judge issued a ruling invalidating a Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulation that allowed contributors to so-called dark money organizations avoid disclosure.
"This ruling looks like a major game changer," said Noah Bookbinder, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). "Based on this ruling, the public should know a whole lot more about who is giving money for the purpose of influencing an election, and it will be much harder for donors to anonymously contribute to groups that advertise in elections."
\u201cBREAKING: We just won a major victory against dark money that could change the political landscape and bring much more transparency to our elections https://t.co/wWwar2zRZb\u201d— Citizens for Ethics (@Citizens for Ethics) 1533399508
CREW was a plaintiff in the case, and had challenged in 2012 Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS--a "not-political committee"--over its failure to disclose who donated $6 million in the Ohio Senate race, a sum CREW argued was subject to federal reporting requirements.
U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell found that Crossroads GPS's defense didn't hold water, writing Friday that the three-decade old FEC regulation at question fell short "of the broad disclosure that Congress intended."
The challenged regulation, she concluded, can facilitate groups' "routing" of contributions to candidates or the groups' affiliated super PACS, and
blatantly undercuts the congressional goal of fully disclosing the sources of money flowing into federal political campaigns, and thereby suppresses the benefits intended to accrue from disclosure, including informing the electorate, deterring corruption, and enforcing bans on foreign contributions being used to buy access and influence to American political officials.
Her decision, CREW explains, means that "dark money groups that spend at least $250 in independent expenditures--a key type of political ad--must report every contributor who gave at least $200 in the past year as well as those who give to finance independent expenditures generally."
In a Twitter thread outlining the importance of ruling, Center for Responsive Politics' Robert Maguire says it "could fundamentally change the role dark money plays in elections (if it has a role at all)."
\u201cThis. Is. Huge. \n\nIt's hard to exaggerate how big of a deal this @CREWcrew victory is. If it stands, it could fundamentally change the role dark money plays in elections (if it has a role at all).\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
\u201cDark money groups will still benefit from certain loopholes that, honestly, might never be closed, like the "issue ad" one we mentioned yesterday https://t.co/X6m6ogyDGg\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
\u201cBUT, that is not at all to downplay the importance of the decision. \n\nConsider that dark money groups have spent more than $733 MILLION (!) on independent expenditures -- the type of spending the case was concerned with -- since Citizens United.\n\nA huge portion of their activity.\u201d— Robert Maguire (@Robert Maguire) 1533402136
Bookbinder agreed, saying it "could dramatically change the American political landscape and result in significantly more transparency."
"Major donors are now on notice that if they contribute to politically active 501(c)(4) organizations, their contributions will have to be disclosed," he said, "and if they are not, CREW will pursue enforcement cases with the FEC and, if necessary, in court."