Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
people waiting at airport in departure lounge.

Just the Facts: Are FAA Staff Cuts Causing Current Airport Delays?

Chinese Investments in Cuba Demonstrate a Waning U.S. Influence in the Region

Chinese Investments in Cuba Demonstrate a Waning U.S. Influence in the Region

Just the Facts: Canadian Tariffs

Just the Facts: Canadian Tariffs

Redistricting

Redistricting

Tracy Chapman and Luke Combs on stage

Luke Combs, politics and healing our nation's divide

VA Secretary Doug Collins Faces Bipartisan Criticism at Senate VA Committee Hearing

VA Secretary Doug Collins Faces Bipartisan Criticism at Senate VA Committee Hearing

Claim: The President may sign an executive order limiting freedom of speech. Fact check: Mixed

President Donald Trump
Pool/Getty Images
Soram Cheon, Medill School
By Soram Cheon, Medill SchoolMay 29, 2020
Soram Cheon, Medill School
See More Writings by author


The president can issue an executive on anything he wants, but its impact and legality is a question. Trump signed an executive order that could limit social media companies' legal protections after Twitter began fact-checking on his posts.

According to The Washington Post, lawmakers in Congress and a variety of legal experts from across the political spectrum "doubted the legality of Trump's draft proposal and feared its implications for free speech."

Some in the tech industry even began quietly discussing their legal options, including a potential lawsuit challenging Trump's order, the Post reported.

Latest news

Just the Facts: What Is a National Emergency?
Governance & Legislation

Just the Facts: What Is a National Emergency?

Child Victims of Crime Are Not Heard
Rule of Law

Child Victims of Crime Are Not Heard

Read More

Money in politics
Super PACs tied to major parties misled voters, complaint alleges
erhui1979/Getty Images

Is It Possible To Reverse Course on the Corruptive Influence of Money in American Politics?

A $288 Billion Dollar Proto-Presidency?

The 2024 presidential election saw Elon Musk spend over a quarter of a billion to elect President Trump, which is exactly $288 million according to The Washington Post report of the final tally of campaign spending on January 31, 2025. Did that staggering campaign contribution buy the billionaire the right to attend cabinet meetings and stand beside the President in the Oval Office and at other events? Did those millions buy a Proto-Presidency, complete with the opportunity to run a department aggressively dismantling government and radically changing what government does for ordinary Americans while personally benefiting from government contracts? Professor Lawrence Lessig argues that ‘Musk is the clearest example of the corrupting influence of money in politics.’ According to a recent PEW study, 72% of Americans agree that money is the number one corrupting influence in politics. So, what can be done? Are we too far down this road to make meaningful change, or are there options?

Keep ReadingShow less
election observer in Nevada

An election observer watches ballots being counted in North Las Vegas, Nevada, on Thursday.

Ethan Miller/Getty Images

Claim: Election observers have not been allowed to do their jobs. Fact check: False

In the early morning hours on Friday, President Trump tweeted, "The OBSERVERS were not allowed, in any way, shape, or form, to do their job and therefore, votes accepted during this period must be determined to be ILLEGAL VOTES." The president did so as the vote margin in Pennsylvania and Georgia continued to close and even put former Vice President Joe Biden ahead in both states.

State rules vary on who is permitted to monitor the polls. However, across the board most states permit partisan monitors as long as they follow guidelines. On Wednesday, the Trump campaign filed lawsuits in Nevada, Michigan and Pennsylvania to give observers greater access to viewing the ballot counting process. With no evidence of wrongdoing in Michigan and the ballot counting process largely finished, a lower court dismissed the lawsuit there.

Keep ReadingShow less
California ballot processing

California's safeguards against voter fraud include signature matching.

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Claim: California sent 440,000 ballots to people who died or moved. Fact check: Mixed

California election officials sent ballots to all active registered voters for the November election. But in a press release distributed Monday, Election Integrity Project California, a self-described nonpartisan watchdog organization, criticized 440,000 "questionable" mailed ballots.

The organization sent a letter to the California secretary of state, writing that 416,633 Californians who were registered to vote on or before Nov. 4, 2008, have not voted or updated their registrations since that date. Because of this, EIPCa wrote, those voters "likely moved or died." Voters in California are marked as "inactive" if they move within the state and do not re-register to vote. However, there is no law in the state that eliminates voters from the active list because they have not voted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lauren Boebert

Colorado congressional candidate Lauren Boebert ties the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to water issues in a misleading campaign video.

Jason Connolly/Getty Images

Fact check: Colorado Democrats are going to 'steal' electoral votes. Fact check: False

On Monday Lauren Boebert, a Republican running for Congress in Colorado's 3rd district, tweeted a campaign video and introduced it by saying, "Stop Democrats from stealing our votes for President and putting Colorado's water at risk." President Trump retweeted it on the same day. She was referring to a bill signed into law by Gov. Jared Polis in 2019 that added Colorado to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would give a state's electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, but only goes into effect if enough states join to guarantee at least 270 electoral votes would be awarded.

The compact is aimed at avoiding the scenario in which the winner of the national popular vote does not also win the Electoral College vote, which most recently happened in 2000 and 2016. However, this legislation won't go into effect this election because only 16 states with a collective 196 electoral votes have signed on. There is also a ballot measure to repeal the law on the November ballot. In the video, Boebert said the law was "giving Colorado's votes to California," insinuating that because of California's size it would hold more influence in the election. However, the Electoral College system already incentivizes campaigns to prioritize certain states, like Florida and Pennsylvania, that have larger populations and swing voters. In the 2020 general election campaign events featuring the candidates have not been held in 37 states, Colorado included.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2025