Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

White House lacked top ethics official for 6 months

The top ethics office at the White House was kept vacant for a crucial six months of the Trump administration, and the president's lawyers sought to keep the situation under wraps, a watchdog group reported Tuesday.


The position was filled last month by Scott Gast, who has been an attorney in the White House counsel's office since the start of Trump' tenure. Stefan Passantino left the job in August and is now working for the Trump Organization, handling demands for materials and testimony in congressional investigations.

The half year when the job was vacant coincided with a particularly turbulent time in the West Wing – with a high degree of staff turnover, the climax of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation and a midterm election that created new oversight worries once the Democrats took control of the House. The top ethics officer's duties include setting and enforcing government ethics guidelines at the White House that prevent conflicts of interest, and the completion of officials' financial disclosure reports.

President Trump's failure to promptly fill the job "is consistent with his preference to leave important government positions vacant," according to CREW, or Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which reported the delay based on results of a Freedom of Information Act request. "Indeed, the president has allowed several agency Inspector General positions to remain vacant for the entire duration of his presidency. Vacancies, however, undermine the authority of acting officials and weaken morale in government offices."

CREW said the record it obtained suggested that the White House was not cooperative with either the Office of Government Ethics or the Government Accountability Office when they sought details of Passantino's decision-making or the delay in replacing him.


Read More

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

People hold Haitian flags and signs during a July 2026 rally in San Diego in support of immigrants living in the U.S. with Temporary Protected Status.

What Comes Next for the 1 Million People Who Have Lost – or Will Soon Lose – Temporary Protected Status

At the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term, 1.3 million individuals from 17 countries were living and working in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status, or TPS.

TPS is a humanitarian form of protection from deportation for people who cannot return to their home countries because of an armed conflict, environmental disaster or other extraordinary circumstances.

Keep ReadingShow less
vote pins

vote pins in red, white, and blue with stars and stripes.

Getty Images

The Long Fight to Secure Voting Rights for All Americans

Many Americans think that all US citizens aged 18 or older are entitled to vote. In fact, that has never really been the case in the USA. It has been a tremendously long, hard road to get to where we are today.

The easy part is that the Twenty-Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 in 1971, in response to the Vietnam War. It was considered unjust to draft men to war who were denied the right to vote. In several states felons are denied the right to vote for life.

Keep ReadingShow less
Seattle Washington city downtown skyline

Seattle Washington city downtown skyline during sunset

Getty Images

Local Seattle Government and Indigenous Communities Unite for Sustainable Efforts

Sustainability in government is a discussion at both the local and national levels. What is common today is that this conversation has long excluded Indigenous communities' voices and perspectives from the legislative process.

Too often, local governments enact environmental and sustainability legislation without considering its impact on Indigenous groups.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman checking mail

Close-up of woman's hand putting or receiving letter with voting ballot near a mailbox near her house -

Getty Images

Why Having a Ballot at Home Strengthens Civic Engagement

A legal challenge regarding mail-in voting rules and postal service regulations is currently moving through the federal court system as the midterm elections approach. The dispute involves administrative directives and postal regulations concerning ballot delivery standards and state requirements. Lower courts have previously addressed how these rules are implemented, prompting appeals and legal filings from various administration officials, state attorneys general, and election administrators over operational timelines and voter access.

Brian Miller is the executive director of Nonprofit VOTE, a nationwide organization that works to help nonprofits engage the communities they serve in voting and elections.
In the article "Voting Is Not a Closed-Book Test," Miller explores mail-in voting and why giving voters time and access is critical to a healthy democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less