Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

New ethics allegations levied against Interior Department

Six senior Interior Department political appointees are at the heart of "a disturbing pattern of misconduct" involving cozy relationships with their former employees, the Campaign Legal Center alleges in a complaint to the department's inspector general.

At a time when Republicans and Democrats alike say they're troubled by the ethical climate in Washington, particular attention has been focused on Interior since the start of the Trump administration. In December, Secretary Ryan Zinke was forced out amid multiple probes of his real estate dealings and other potential conflicts of interest – the fourth member of Trump's Cabinet to resign under an ethics cloud. And his would-be successor, David Bernhardt, is facing a tough path to Senate confirmation because of his past as an oil and agriculture industry lobbyist.


The Campaign Legal Center, a watchdog group focused on government accountability, contends that some of the officials named may have used their positions to give their former work colleagues – now in industries regulated by the department and at conservative think tanks – insider knowledge of Interior activities. Under the White House's "drain the swamp" ethics policies, such officials are supposed to wait two years after their leaving the administration before having any interaction about policy with previous employers.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

"This is a big deal," CLC ethics lawyer Delaney Marsco told the Intercept, which provided some of the reporting that led to the complaint. "It not only reveals a pattern of indifference toward ethics at Interior's highest levels, but it also calls into question the true motives of our public servants tasked with the immense responsibility of managing the country's natural resources."

The Interior Department has declined to comment on the specifics. But Bernhardt, who is running the department as acting secretary, announced recently that he had boosted Interior's own watchdog operations in an effort to "dramatically transform a culture of ethics avoidance into one of ethics compliance."

Read More

Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Government Debt Ceiling - Capitol, Congress and Senate - Budget Package

Getty Images//Stock Photo

Between a Rock and a Hard Place

On January 20, 2025, at the moment he takes the oath of office, President Trump will find himself between a rock and a hard place. The rock is the nature of his job, that he must carry out the laws of the land, including the spending of money on Congressionally approved programs. Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution establishes one of the President’s core responsibilities – “He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

The hard place is that on January 1, 2025, the 2023 suspension of the debt ceiling law expired. The ceiling is now 31.4 trillion dollars, while the debt is over 36 trillion. Trump 47 will be the first President to be constrained by the debt ceiling on day one. Starting January 1 and continuing from January 20, absent some action by Congress, every dollar spent will add a fraction of a dollar to the national debt, putting the President further and further out of compliance with the debt ceiling law.

Keep ReadingShow less
In Dark Times, We Should Celebrate Every Victory for the Rule of Law

President-elect Donald Trump speaks to the press following a meeting with Senate Republicans at the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, DC on January 8, 2025.

(Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

In Dark Times, We Should Celebrate Every Victory for the Rule of Law

On Friday, Donald Trump’s status as a convicted felon was made official in the New York courtroom of Judge Juan Merchan. As he handed down a sentence of “unconditional release,” the judge delivered a stern rebuke to the president-elect.

The New York Times reported that Merchan “acknowledged that “the office of president carries with it a “legal mandate,” but that it does not take away from the seriousness of the jury verdict….’Donald Trump the ordinary citizen,’ ‘Donald Trump, the criminal defendant,’” the judge suggested, “would not be entitled to the protections of the presidency…him from the seriousness of the verdict.”

Keep ReadingShow less