Sign in

smcphail.bsky.social

@smcphail.bsky.social
106 followers 105 following 266 posts

Director of Campaign Finance Litigation at Citizens For Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

PostsRepliesMedia
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Trump may now be paying for his campaign ads with maga inc funds rather than taxpayer funds, but it’s still illegal. Office holders can’t direct super PAC spending.
000
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 01/10/2026
COURT WIN: In 2024, we sued on behalf of 2 GA voters over $5 million in spending on Senate races that was routed through multiple groups to hide its source. The FEC had split along partisan lines, with 3 commissioners improperly raising the bar and declining to investigate.
17631
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 01/10/2026
Good News: The 9th Circuit upheld an Arizona law created to combat corrupt elections and strengthen the state’s disclosure rules. In 2024, we filed an amicus brief in support of it. State laws can help close federal loopholes and bring real transparency to state elections.
28036
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Campaign Legal Center @campaignlegal.org · 01/10/2026
BREAKING: In a victory for voters, a federal appeals court upheld Arizona's Prop 211, the landmark voter-approved law that reveals the original sources of dark money election spending. Campaign Legal Center Action represents Voters’ Right to Know in this case.
campaignlegal.org
Federal Court Upholds Landmark Campaign Finance Transparency Law in Arizona
SAN FRANCISCO — Yesterday, in a major victory for Arizonans, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Proposition 211, also known as the Voters’ Right to Know Act. Approved by 7...
173
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 30/09/2026
@citizensforethics.org also noted that the plaintiffs' requested relief - effectively a judicial ban on criticizing them, their donors, or their benefiting officials over the sources of their support - violates American's First Amendment rights.
000
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 30/09/2026
@citizensforethics.org filed an amicus in support of the law, pointing to the inadequacies in alternative tracing methods like requiring recipients to self-report donors' subjective motives to influence elections. www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/u...
citizensforethics.org
101
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 30/09/2026
NEW - 9th Circuit upholds Arizona's anti-dark money initiative. Importantly, holds voters right to know doesn't end with the immediate funder of the ad, but goes back to the donor behind it - the person likely to buy influence. cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/op...
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov
100
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
ProPublica @propublica.org · 23/09/2026
NEW: ProPublica revealed that the FBI was circling Sen. Collins over a defense contractor’s donations — until Trump gutted the unit in charge. Collins has since mustered a defense with a series of incorrect and misleading claims.
propublica.org
ProPublica Debunks Susan Collins’ Claims About FBI Anti-Corruption Probe
ProPublica revealed that the FBI was circling Sen. Collins over a defense contractor’s donations — until President Trump gutted the unit in charge. Collins has since mustered a defense with a series o...
9928651193
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
In other words, in the campaign finance world built by SCOTUS:
010
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
A quid pro quo, or just "access and influence" donors earn? SCOTUS tells us only the former is problematic. But millions in taxpayer funds may have been misallocated, reflecting neither merit nor popular will, but solely a kick back of campaign contributions. Either way, taxpayers get bilked.
110
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
And if we rely on government agencies for enforcement, they are the same people who may either be corrupted themselves or are serving people that are corrupted. The FBI was apparently waived off this investigation by those in power.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
“Vigilant enforcement,” SCOTUS just told us this summer, is the best means to prevent wrongdoing. But that ignores the reality – unlike observable and verifiable metrics like contribution limits, quid pro quos aren’t done in the open for people to see.
111
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
The record shows—even putting aside the allegations of bribery—this influence worked: Collins made efforts to benefit the donating contractor.
111
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
We’re often given a false choice: anonymous political activity or full public disclosure. But large contributions are rarely, if ever, anonymous. Donors want influence (or bribes) for their money, which requires officials to know who they are. The donors are only “anonymous” to the voting public.
110
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
But the super PAC was in fact closely associated with Senator Collins and made sure she knew who was donating, even if the public didn't. The donor clearly understood it was important Senator Collins knew they were behind this supposedly low-value contribution.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
The contractor's money went to a super PAC – a group that is supposedly independent of candidates. When SCOTUS (with help of the DC Circuit) unleashed super PACs, they assured us this independence meant there was no significant risk that contributions to super PACs would result in bribes.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
Pro Publica reports that a military-contractor – someone the law forbids from electioneering—engaged in a multi-million dollar bribery scheme with members of congress in exchange for government contracts. Though counterparties deny involvement, the reporting is still revealing.
110
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
Must read piece in Pro Publica on the reality of today’s campaign finance system that shows the false promises SCOTUS made that got us here. 🧵https://www.propublica.org/article/fbi-susan-collins-navatek-campaign-donations-investigation
propublica.org
The FBI Anti-Corruption Squad Was Circling Susan Collins — Until Trump Got in the Way
After the FBI caught a defense contractor’s CEO making illegal campaign contributions, it sought to launch a sweeping political bribery probe involving Collins and others. Then the second Trump admini...
1118
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 21/09/2026
Since Trump’s pardons, insurrectionists have sought offices from town clerk and school board all the way up to governorships and congressional seats—but voters across the country are overwhelmingly rejecting them. 🧵
39948
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 16/09/2026
Conditioning funding based on a recipient’s support or opposition to a particular political candidate or party is a violation of the Hatch Act. The Office of Special Counsel must investigate the Trump admin's "partisan punishment of American citizens."
citizensforethics.org
Trump administration’s politicized federal grant decisions violate the Hatch Act - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
The Trump administration’s admitted cancellation of federal grants to states based on their political identity is a Hatch Act violation.
18947
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Robert Maguire @robertmaguire.bsky.social · 16/09/2026
Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee on March 12, 2024, and within days, he started creating new companies and slapping his name on products. He hasn't stopped since. The tally now stands at 81 new businesses—36 since taking office (he started two more while I was drafting this report)
citizensforethics.org
Trump incorporated dozens of new companies in lead up to second term—and never stopped - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Trump filed a financial disclosure in June revealing he brought in more than $2.2 billion in revenue during 2025. We found that more than a third of that revenue came from dozens of companies Trump ha...
510857
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Shana M. Broussard @shanambroussard.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
One year ago, I started highlighting the growing number of enforcement matters that the FEC cannot resolve until we regain a quorum. Last year, there were 154. Now, it’s doubled to 307. We need a quorum to tackle this backlog and fully achieve the agency’s mission this election.
0157
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 28/08/2026
So Meta is donating $5 million to dark money groups for both the R and D sides of the house and senate. But I've been assured by SCOTUS that donors only contribute to these groups to fund speech they support....
0123
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 27/08/2026
NEW: Trump reported bringing in over $2.2 billion in revenue during 2025. More than a third of that revenue came from dozens of companies Trump had just incorporated months before. The data makes clear Trump’s intention to capitalize on the presidency like *never* before.
410863
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Michael Beckel @mjbeckel.bsky.social · 24/08/2026
👀 More examples of big super PAC contribs buying access to POTUS. By @issueonereform.bsky.social's count, these will be at least the 13th and 14th big money super PAC fundraising events President Trump will have attended since he was elected in Nov 2024. h/t @cbsnews.com @gabekaminsky.bsky.social
11712
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 24/08/2026
The incoherence of Bluman and Citizens United gives the lie to SCOTUS's campaign finance case law. Bluman recognized $ doesn't = speech: it "influences" rather than persuades, even if never spent on speech. Issue now before 1st Cir in super PAC case.
citizensforethics.org
020
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Brennan Center @brennancenter.org · 23/08/2026
Massive political spending is an avenue for the sort of undue influence that most American voters view as corrupt. Restoring confidence in government will require major reforms to address the concentration of private wealth and public power.
brennancenter.org
Cyclospora Outbreak Shows Why So Many Americans Are Angry About Corruption
Following major lobbying and campaign spending from the food industry, an important safety rule has been delayed for years.
6205105
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Scott MacFarlane @macfarlanenews.bsky.social · 21/08/2026
EXCLUSIVE: Committee Review Finds Trump Pardons Have Cost Crime Victims $1.7 Billion and Enriched Trump Allies macfarlanenews.substack.com/p/exclusive-...
6122791271
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 13/08/2026
NEW: Trump's second term has taken corruption to an entirely new level—expanding the ways he can profit from the presidency, reward allies and use the power of his office for personal gain. Here are 10 ways Trump's second term is even more corrupt than his first.
citizensforethics.org
10 ways President Trump is more corrupt this term - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Crypto schemes, corrupt politicians pardon, foreign deals, funding the ballroom, promoting his properties—Trump's corruption has worsened.
611879
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Adam Smith @asmith83.bsky.social · 12/08/2026
NEW: With partners, @citizensforethics.org just filed suit on behalf of The Intercept and Freedom of the Press Foundation to stop TruthSocial's early access subscriptions. www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action...
citizensforethics.org
Truth Social's $100,000-per-month subscription for early access to Trump posts is unconstitutional - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
President Trump's scheme to charge $100,000 per month for advance access to official government announcements on Truth Social violates the First and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution.
0123
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
But I've been assured that all the court decisions during that time striking down campaign finance laws have been expanding free speech rights (if you're rich enough to afford them of course)?
000
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 03/08/2026
BREAKING: We just sued the Treasury Department for illegally withholding information about who is receiving settlement money from its Judgement Fund. Taxpayers need to know whether Jan. 6ers and Trump allies are getting massive payouts from the federal government.
citizensforethics.org
CREW sues Treasury Department for concealing January 6th settlement details  - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
The Treasury Department is illegally concealing who is receiving settlement money from its Judgment Fund, obscuring whether January 6th insurrectionists are receiving payouts.
5251107
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 22/07/2026
NEW: The Jan. 6 insurrection left American taxpayers with $2.7 billion in costs that were never recovered. Now, convicted Jan. 6 defendants are trying to use the Federal Tort Claims Act to extract substantial and secretive payouts from the government.
citizensforethics.org
January 6ers cost taxpayers $2.7 billion. Now they're seeking secret payouts. - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
January 6ers could seek negotiations for secretive payouts through the Federal Tort Claims Act should Congress fail to take action.
6199142
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Campaign Legal Center @campaignlegal.org · 09/07/2026
We helped secure a big win for Arizona voters! The Arizona Supreme Court upheld Prop 211, the voter-approved law that reveals the original sources of money spent in elections and protects voters’ right to know who is spending big money to influence their vote. 1/3
campaignlegal.org
Major Victory for Election Transparency as Arizona Disclosure Law is Upheld
In a huge victory for Arizonans, Campaign Legal Center, our local Arizona partners, and for the fight against dark money in our elections, the Arizona Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of...
164
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 28/05/2026
BREAKING: We filed for a temporary restraining order to block the transfer of $1.8B from the Treasury Dept to Trump's slush fund. Trump can't unilaterally and secretly disburse these taxpayer funds. The court must stop this grift before it's too late. www.citizensforethics.org/news/press-r...
citizensforethics.org
CREW files for restraining order to immediately block Trump’s $1.8 billion slush fund - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
The court should issue a temporary restraining order to immediately halt the transfer of $1.776 billion to Trump’s secretive slush fund.
8392145
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 22/05/2026
BREAKING: We sued the DOJ, Treasury Department and IRS to block the Trump admin from handing out $1.8 billion in taxpayer funds to Trump's allies who claim to be victims of government weaponization. This settlement is one of the single most corrupt acts in American history.
citizensforethics.org
CREW sues to block Trump’s $1.8 billion slush fund - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
The Trump administration’s $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” slush fund is unconstitutional and violates multiple federal laws.
19460178
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
Campaign Legal Center @campaignlegal.org · 07/05/2026
NEW: CLC and @citizensforethics.org are suing the FEC to stop a loophole that permits outside groups — like Elon Musk’s super PAC in 2024 — to coordinate with candidates and spend millions of dollars on canvassing.
campaignlegal.org
New Lawsuit Challenges Illegal FEC Opinion That Greenlights Coordinated Spending on Canvassing
In a new lawsuit, Campaign Legal Center, alongside Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington (CREW) as co-counsel, is calling on the courts to step in and immediately declare a 2024 FEC Advisory O...
042
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 07/05/2026
BREAKING: We, alongside @campaignlegal.org, sued the FEC over its advisory opinion allowing wealthy donors and special interests to spend millions in coordination with candidates—while hiding who may be spending big to influence votes. The court must reject this illegal opinion.
citizensforethics.org
CREW, CLC sue FEC to strike down unlawful advisory opinion on canvassing coordination - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Campaign Legal Center and CREW filed a complaint asking the U.S. District Court for DC to strike down an unlawful 2024 FEC advisory opinion.
314762
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 06/05/2026
Buckley’s advocates claimed “money is speech.” That gets the 1A backwards. Every human act is speech; every act expresses intents and opinions. The 1A doesn’t immunise them all. It blocks govt attempts to limit info, not attempts to stop other evils. www.citizensforethics.org/reports-inve...
citizensforethics.org
Remembering Buckley's mistakes - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
“Money is speech” our current campaign finance jurisprudence tells us. And while many consider the 2010 decision of Citizens United v. FEC as the source of that edict, it is actually much older.
010
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 06/05/2026
Fascinating deep dive into backroom deals and double dealing that led to perhaps the most consequential campaign finance case that put up elections up for sale. www.nytimes.com/2026/05/06/u...
nytimes.com
A Look Inside the Case That Enshrined Political Power for Billionaires
100
Reposted by @smcphail.bsky.social
CREW @citizensforethics.org · 30/04/2026
NEW: We just submitted an amicus brief urging the court to reject the National Park Service's effort to remove an exhibit about freedom and slavery from Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia. Read more:
citizensforethics.org
CREW files amicus brief in support of restoring Freedom and Slavery Exhibit - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
Removing the Freedom and Slavery Exhibit at the Independence National Historical Park would undercut an accurate portrayal of U.S. history.
013645
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 27/04/2026
# of audience members incited to attack government officials: Trump: 600+ Kimmel: 0
000
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
That's is an absurd misreading of the law - one that makes the complaint process a farce. It is solely designed to twist the law and make it a protection racket of "loyal" partisans, free to license allies to act with impunity - to deprive Americans of democracy without any legal recourse.
010
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
You couldn't sue for a dismissal since one didn't happen. You *also* couldn't sue for a failure-to-act: the agency did act under this theory - it deadlocked, and that's all you would be entitled to. *And* you'd never know happened because the agency would never publish its file.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
Those commissioners could unilaterally protect their allies, preventing the case from moving forward. They could then unilaterally refuse to terminate the case. The matter would be stuck at the agency. The agency's file would never be published. And there'd be no relief.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
But Rao's question would make any en banc correction of New Model's irrelevant and would rather super charge that decision and the power of a single partisan block of commissioners.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
But that plan still required a bipartisan vote to close the file (though the proponents of this scheme are working to undo that too). And it at least meant the agency's file was published. And the DC Circuit is currently reconsidering it en banc, so the ruse may not have long left.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
So these partisan-aligned commissioners could deprive Americans of their FECA rights for any reason they wanted--perhaps "loyalty" to the co-partisan respondent politician--and, if they could get a dismissal, prevent a court from even looking into it. x.com/rickhasen/st...
x.com
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
Notably, Judge Rao is also the author of the DC Circuit's decision in New Models, a case that said that a single political party's commissioners can unilaterally prevent suits challenging the FEC's dismissals.
100
smcphail.bsky.social @smcphail.bsky.social · 20/04/2026
You'd file a complaint, wait and hear nothing, sue the agency, find out they deadlocked and weren't going to do anything about your complaint. But then if you sued to say the FEC wasn't moving forward, it would turn out the *deadlock*--the failure to move forward--was all the law required.
110