Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Advocacy groups call on presidential candidates to disclose bundlers

Sixteen advocacy groups, including some of the most influential players in the political reform movement, co-signed a letter Thursday urging 2020 presidential candidates to voluntarily disclose their top individual fundraisers, or "bundlers," during their campaign bids.

The letter asked the candidates to create a system to "regularly and meaningfully" disclose details about the campaign's bundlers — individuals who solicit and collect donations from others and then deliver those funds in a "bundle" to aid a candidate's campaign.


Bundlers who successfully pool large amounts of money from a network of well-heeled donors are often rewarded with desirable post-election appointments, such as ambassadorships.

Former presidents and presidential candidates from both parties, such as George W. Bush and Barack Obama, have voluntarily disclosed bundler details, Politico noted. During the 2016 election cycle, however, presidential candidates had "a mixed record of releasing bundler information."

"Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush released lists of their top fundraisers, though Clinton released less information about the people raising money for her campaign than Obama had. But others, including President Donald Trump, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, did not identify their bundlers," the article noted.

The letter asked the candidates to:

  • Disclose bundler information in reports that coincide with regular Federal Election Commission reporting requirements.
  • Provide the name, city, state and ZIP code of every bundler along with their employer and occupation — information that candidates must already provide for large donors.
  • Update regularly the aggregate amount each bundler has raised for their campaign.
  • Publish this information on their official website in a format that can be searched, sorted and downloaded.

The groups also requested that the eventual nominees include in subsequent reports how much bundlers raise for their party, as well as state and national party committees and joint fundraising committees that benefit the winning candidate.

The 16 advocacy groups that co-signed the letter include the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, Public Citizen, Represent.Us and Issue One. (The Firewall is being incubated by Issue One but remains journalistically independent.)


Read More

Where Do Territorial Courts Fall in Our Constitutional Framework?

Black and white sketch of a courtroom in session.

illustration provided

Where Do Territorial Courts Fall in Our Constitutional Framework?

The Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook have understandably been read as cases about presidential control over executive officers. But they may have implications for a different and largely overlooked question lurking in a pending Supreme Court case: Who may exercise the judicial power of the United States in the territories?

This question made a cameo appearance in the Slaughter case. The majority noted in a footnote that “a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia” exercises “the judicial power of the District, just as territorial judges exercise the judicial power of their respective territories” — not the executive power. Therefore, the court went on, “the fact that Congress may prohibit the President from firing the District’s judges (who do not exercise his power) says nothing about whether Congress may prohibit the President from firing his subordinates (who do).”

Keep ReadingShow less
Affordability Crisis - Role of Non-Popular Vote President’s  SCOTUS Appointees

Silhouette of a hand holding a vote putting in a ballot box in front of the national flag Stars and Stripes of USA.

Getty Images

Affordability Crisis - Role of Non-Popular Vote President’s SCOTUS Appointees

The 21st-century Supreme Court Justices appointed by presidents who did not win the popular vote have fundamentally reshaped the affordability crisis by dismantling federal regulatory authority, weakening consumer protections, and expanding landlords' and local governments' property rights over renters.

Specifically, five current justices fit this description: Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito (appointed by George W. Bush following the 2000 election), alongside Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett (appointed by Donald Trump following the 2016 election). This conservative supermajority has heavily influenced cost-of-living metrics through historic rulings in administrative, housing, and financial law.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Long Tradition of Lawyers Defending U.S. Democracy

women in a courtroom

Getty Images

The Long Tradition of Lawyers Defending U.S. Democracy

For centuries, lawyers have been leaders in establishing and protecting our democracy and its cornerstone, the rule of law. They have challenged tyrants, whether it be King George III in our nation’s founding or President Trump, a wannabe king, today.

Lawyers swear to do this in an oath, which is a condition of admission to the bar, to “support the Constitution of the United States.” This sworn duty continues a centuries-old tradition.

Keep ReadingShow less
California Latinos Showed Up—Now Party Insiders Want to Shut Them Out

Xavier Becerra

Getty Images

California Latinos Showed Up—Now Party Insiders Want to Shut Them Out

Political strategist, IVN commentator, and The Latino Century author Mike Madrid has a blunt warning for California: The campaign to repeal the state’s nonpartisan Top Two primary would disproportionately silence the fastest-growing segment of the electorate.

In a new Sacramento Bee op-ed, Madrid argues that Latino voters—particularly those who do not align with either major party—played a significant role in California’s record-setting June primary.

Keep ReadingShow less