SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
In Bid to Be First-in-the-Nation, Minnesota House Votes to Bar Multinational Corporations from Interfering in State Elections
The Minnesota House of Representatives passed the Democracy for the People Act on Thursday, which includes a provision that will effectively ban foreign-influenced corporate spending in state and local elections. The bill now moves to the state senate.
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota
The Minnesota House of Representatives voted Thursday to pass a landmark campaign finance law that will prohibit the influence of foreign corporate spending in elections. With a pending vote anticipated in the state senate, the vote sets Minnesota on the path to be the first state in the nation to pass such legislation.
The Democracy for the People Act, an omnibus democracy bill designed to strengthen voting rights, protect voters and the elections system, and modernize the campaign finance system, includes a provision that will bar foreign-influenced corporations from spending money to influence state elections. It would also create automatic voter registration, authorize pre-registration for sixteen and seventeen-year-olds to vote, and establish a permanent absentee voting list, among other measures.
The new ban on foreign-influenced corporations spending money to influence elections stems from model legislation developed by Free Speech For People, a national nonpartisan non-profit organization that works to renew our democracy. Free Speech For People helped to pass similar legislation in Seattle, Washington in 2020. Five additional states (Hawaii, California, Washington, New York, and Massachusetts) and the federal government are considering similar bans.
Once enforced, Minnesota's new legislation will ensure that any company that is owned five percent by multiple foreign owners, or one percent by a single foreign owner, will be prohibited from spending money directly or giving it to a super PAC to spend in Minnesota state or local elections.
"Multinational corporations are corrupting representative democracy by drowning out the voices of the people." says Alexandra Flores-Quilty, Campaign Director at Free Speech For People. "The Democracy for the People Act will help put power back in the hands of citizens."
"Corporate executives know where their bread is buttered. This bill addresses the threat to Minnesota's democratic self-government posed by corporate political spending by foreign-influenced corporations," says Free Speech For People Legal Director Ron Fein.
"Minnesota has long been a leader in democracy and so it's no surprise that the House voted today to put Minnesota on the path to becoming the first state to prohibit foreign-influenced corporations from spending in our elections," says Lilly Sasse, Campaign Director of We Choose Us. "When we conducted polling in November, we found that over 80% of Minnesotans support this policy. It's clear to the people of Minnesota that prohibiting foreign-influenced corporations from spending in our elections is good for our democracy. And after today, it's clear that we're on the path to signing it into law."
For more information about the new legislation, visit.
To read the bill, visit.
Free Speech For People is a national non-partisan non-profit organization founded on the day of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC that works to defend our democracy and our Constitution.
LATEST NEWS
'Pay-to-Play Loyalty Program': Trump Ballroom Donors Have Been Handed $50 Billion in Federal Contracts
"Corporations wrote big checks to build Trump’s golden ballroom," said Rep. Jason Crow. "Now they’re receiving billions of dollars in kickbacks—paid for by your tax dollars."
Jun 05, 2026
Sen. Elizabeth Warren suggested President Donald Trump is running a "pay-to-play loyalty program for wealthy donors" after a report on Thursday revealed that more than half the companies that contributed to his White House ballroom project have been awarded government contracts over the last six months, totaling over $50 billion.
Examining the 27 publicly known corporate donors to the president’s $400 million gold-plated vanity project, the watchdog group Public Citizen found that 14 of them—more than half—had received either new or expanded contracts over the past six months after donating millions to the ballroom and appearing at a lavish White House banquet in October as Trump prepared to demolish the building's East Wing.
Over two-thirds, 19 of the 27 companies, received government contracts since fiscal year 2021, totaling over $338 billion. At least 16 out of 27 are also either facing federal enforcement actions and/or have had them suspended by the Trump administration.
“These giant corporations aren’t funding the Trump ballroom fiasco out of the goodness of their hearts. They have massive interests before the federal government, and they hope to curry favor with, and receive favorable treatment from, the Trump administration,” said Public Citizen democracy advocate Jon Golinger, an author of the report.
By far the biggest monetary beneficiary has been the military contractor Lockheed Martin, which received a $43.8 billion in new or expanded contract funding over the past six months after it pledged $10 million to fund the dance hall last fall.
Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting company that serves military and intelligence agencies and pledged at least $5 million to the project, received $4 billion in contracts over the same period.
Meanwhile, Palantir—the data-mining surveillance giant with deep ties to the Trump administration—reaped over $1 billion in contracts after giving its own $5 million donation.
"Millions to fund Trump’s bizarre fever dreams are nothing compared to the billions they’re getting back in contracts and favorable government enforcement decisions," Golinger said. "The American people are paying the price.”
Other ballroom benefactors that have brought in more than $100 million worth of contracts over the past six months include Microsoft, Amazon, HP, and Caterpillar, while T-Mobile, Google, NextEra Energy, and Comcast have all brought in more than $10 million.
Public Citizen noted that while the White House has publicized some of the ballroom donors and others have been revealed by news organizations, not all of the companies that have contributed to the project are publicly known, since the secret funding agreement obtained by the group through a Freedom of Information Act request allows their identities to remain private.
In a statement to The Washington Post, White House spokesperson Davis Ingle suggested that critics should be grateful that Trump was soliciting donations from the wealthy for this very important undertaking.
“The same critics who are alleging fake conflicts of interest would also complain if American taxpayers were footing the bill for these long-overdue renovations,” he said, ignoring the fact that Trump has previously pressured Republicans in Congress to appropriate hundreds of millions in taxpayer funding to secure the ballroom.
Ingle added that “the donors for the White House ballroom project represent a wide array of great American companies and generous individuals, all of whom are contributing to make the People’s House better for generations to come.”
But several Democratic members of Congress have pointed to it as evidence of Trump selling out the government "to the highest bidder."
“Corporations wrote big checks to build Trump’s golden ballroom,” said Rep. Jason Crow (D-Col.). “Now they’re receiving billions of dollars in kickbacks—paid for by your tax dollars.”
“Wild coincidence or taxpayer-funded corruption?” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). “You be the judge.”
Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) said that “the part that should make your blood boil” is the fact that many of the companies identified in the report “were facing federal enforcement actions, antitrust reviews, labor cases, [or] securities charges.”
"Many of those cases have been quietly dropped or scaled back since Trump took office. You write a check, your legal problems disappear," Levin said. "That’s not a coincidence."
“You cannot afford to donate to Trump’s ballroom, so he does nothing to improve the quality of your life,” said Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). “But for those who can, there are billions in government contracts.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judge Strikes Down Trump 'Anti-Immigrant' Policies, Orders Restart of Asylum Processing
“This ruling reaffirms a basic principle: The federal government cannot shut down lawful immigration pathways or discriminate against people based on where they come from,” said one advocate.
Jun 05, 2026
A federal judge in Rhode Island on Friday struck down a series of President Donald Trump's policies that he ruled were rooted in "anti-immigrant sentiments" and ordered the administration to resume processing of asylum grants and immigration benefit applications of people from 39 targeted countries.
Last November, US Citizenship and Immigration Services indefinitely suspended asylum adjudications and froze immigration applications for people affected by a travel ban implemented after a man from Afghanistan allegedly shot two National Guard troops in Washington, DC.
Trump vowed to “permanently pause migration from all Third World countries” and expedite the removal of people his administration doesn’t consider “a net asset” to the United States. The administration's move halted the ability of people from affected nations to obtain green cards, US citizenship, and other benefits.
US District Judge John J. McConnell Jr., an appointee of former President Barack Obama, said in his ruling that the administration's policies are rooted in “anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making" and have placed immigrants living in the United States in "indeterminate legal limbo."
“The challenged policies placed the lives of countless individuals on hold—solely by virtue of their countries of birth,” McConnell wrote. “Over six months later, many of those individuals remain without work, without legal status, and without any meaningful ability to plan for their futures.”
“The government effectively invites the court to shut its eyes and ignore the strong evidence of anti-immigrant animus before it,” the judge added. “Doing so would require profound naiveté on the court’s part. Unfortunately for the government, that is an invitation that this court will have to decline.”
US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) General Counsel James Percival slammed McConnell's ruling in a social media post accusing "the Left" of "running the same gambit with so-called 'animus' claims since 2017."
"It is sabotage dressed in legal clothing," Percival added. "It goes like this: (1) the admin is racist, (2) therefore a policy I don’t like is motivated by race, (3) therefore it is invalid. They have used it on virtually every Trump-era DHS policy."
Plaintiffs and others involved in the case welcomed McConnell's decision.
“This ruling reaffirms a basic principle: The federal government cannot shut down lawful immigration pathways or discriminate against people based on where they come from,” Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said in a statement.
"These unlawful policies caused enormous harm to families, workers, asylum seekers, and communities across the country who were left in limbo, unable to work, access protections, or move forward with their lives," Perryman added. "We are pleased that the court recognized the devastating human consequences of these policies. Our communities deserve a fair process governed by law, not political targeting rooted in fear-mongering and discrimination.”
🚨 STATEMENT: Federal Judge Rejects Trump Admin’s Unlawful Immigration Restrictions, Restoring Access to Asylum for Immigrant NYers“Everyone deserves a fair chance to have their case heard under the law." Murad Awawdehnyic.org/press
[image or embed]
— New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC) (@thenyic.bsky.social) June 5, 2026 at 10:43 AM
Milagro Sique, CEO at the Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island, said: “Today is a good day. On behalf of the thousands of immigrants we serve, we are grateful to Judge McConnell for his ruling."
"These policies were wrong, plain and simple, and caused profound fear and uncertainty for so many of our friends, neighbors, and coworkers," Sique added. "Having the judicial process work as intended—by upholding the rule of law—gives us some reassurance that all is not lost and allows those who have been impacted to move forward with their lives in a meaningful way."
Abbey Koenning-Rutherford, staff attorney at Muslim Advocates, said that "today’s decision is an unsparing rejection of the government’s discriminatory and unlawful actions to gut access to immigration benefits under the false pretext of national security."
“These policies unjustly revived the discriminatory logic of the first Muslim and African bans and expanded them widely to millions of community members already inside the United States," she continued, referring to policies enacted during Trump's first term.
"In vacating these unlawful policies, the court makes it unmistakably clear that the Trump administration cannot hold the lives of immigrants in legal limbo based on their countries of birth, and must continue processing their applications for status and benefits as required by law," Koenning-Rutherford added.
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—an immigrant from India—was among the Democratic lawmakers who applauded Friday's ruling, writing on social media that "this is a BIG win."
"A judge has now reaffirmed that Trump’s freeze on processing immigration applications for 39 countries is illegal and that processing must restart immediately," she added. "Today’s ruling is not the end of the fight, but it is a major step in the right direction."
Keep ReadingShow Less
John Fetterman Under Fire for Letting Nomination of ‘Crony Trump Judge’ Advance
"At a time when Trump is corrupting the courts with crony judges who will rig our economy and attack our rights and freedoms for decades, Democrats cannot afford to treat these nominations like business as usual."
Jun 05, 2026
Democratic Sen. John Fetterman is coming under fire from progressives for allowing one of President Donald Trump’s judicial nominees from his home state of Pennsylvania to advance to a confirmation hearing.
As reported by Punchbowl News, Fetterman (D-Pa.) this week waived his right to block the nomination of former federal prosecutor Antonio Pozos for a lifetime appointment in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In doing this, Fetterman became the first Democratic senator to waive this right during Trump's second term.
Under the Senate's "blue slip courtesy" tradition, senators can opt not to return a blue slip—named for the color of the paper form—to the Judiciary Committee for a particular judicial nominee from their home state, if they don't believe the nomination should advance. A spokesperson for Fetterman confirmed he had turned in a blue slip for Pozos on Friday.
This drew the ire of Demand Justice, which vowed on Friday to take out a six-figure ad campaign against the Pennsylvania Democrat for letting a "crony Trump judge" move toward confirmation.
"At a time when Trump is corrupting the courts with crony judges who will rig our economy and attack our rights and freedoms for decades," the group said, "Democrats cannot afford to treat these nominations like business as usual."
In an interview with Punchbowl News, Demand Justice president Josh Orton called on all Democrats, not just Fetterman, "to stand up to Trump’s attacks on the rule of law," imploring them to "do so in every room—not just on Twitter and not just on TV."
Demand Justice has argued that all of Trump's judicial nominees have refused to contradict the president's false claim that he won the 2020 election or to denounce the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, and has called on Democrats to block everyone he's nominated to the federal bench.
Progressive organizing group Indivisible also criticized Fetterman for enabling Pozos' nomination to go through, while hinting at a future primary challenger for the first-term senator should he run for re-election in 2028.
"Alleged Democrat John Fetterman has decided to let one of Trump’s judicial nominees move forward for a lifetime appointment," wrote Indivisible. "Fetterman’s betrayal of his voters and everything he claimed to campaign for is why he will be a one-term senator."
Fetterman in 2025 tied with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) as the Senate Democrat who voted for the most Trump Cabinet nominations. Data published by VoteHub in February showed that Fetterman has voted on legislation with Trump more than any Democratic senator.
He is also the only Democrat in the Senate to consistently oppose war powers resolutions aimed at ending Trump's illegal war of choice with Iran.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular