“Trump signs order to claim power over independent agencies”

Politico:

President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed a sweeping executive order bringing independent agencies under the control of the White House — an action that would greatly expand his power but is likely to attract significant legal challenges.

It represents Trump’s latest attempt to consolidate power beyond boundaries other presidents have observed and to test the so-called unitary executive theory, which states that the president has the sole authority over the executive branch. And it reflects the influence of Russ Vought, Trump’s budget chief, one of several conservatives in his orbit who have called for axing independent arms of the executive branch.

The theory was long considered fringe, and many mainstream legal scholars still believe it is illegal, given that Congress set the agencies up specifically to act independently, or semi-independently, from the president. These include the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, all of which enact regulations and can impose hefty fines on businesses that violate the rules.

Other presidents have not only declined to challenge the independence of these agencies in court, but have in many cases tried to avoid even the appearance of interference in their actions. Many leaders appointed to the agencies serve terms that last longer than a single presidency, in an effort to help shield them from political pressure.

The order would take that independence away by granting Vought, who reports to Trump, supervising power.

The executive order requires Vought, as the director of the Office of Management and Budget, to “establish performance standards and management objectives” for the heads of independent agencies and “report periodically to the President on their performance and efficiency in attaining such standards and objectives.” It also requires Vought to review and make changes to the agencies’ budgets “as necessary and appropriate, to advance the President’s policies and priorities.”

“For the Federal Government to be truly accountable to the American people, officials who wield vast executive power must be supervised and controlled by the people’s elected President,” the executive order states.

While the executive order is sweeping in nature and represents a fundamental reshaping of the federal government, it effectively codifies actions the Trump administration has already been taking, setting up the administration’s legal position in an expected court fight. Trump has, for instance, already fired Gwynne Wilcox, former chair of the National Labor Relations Board, the NLRB’s general counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo, and Office of Government Ethics Director David Huitema. Wilcox has filed a lawsuit contesting her dismissal.

And Vought, almost immediately upon taking office, assumed the title of acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, another independent agency, halting further funding to the agency and firing its employees en masse.

But the order has broad — and potentially immediate — implications for a host of other independent agencies that have not yet been penetrated by the administration. And while it doesn’t apply to the Federal Reserve’s handling of monetary policy, it does apply to the Fed’s other responsibilities, including overseeing banks and other financial institutions….

Share this:

“Georgia Republicans advance a plan to leave a bipartisan voter data group, despite warnings”

AP:

For years, Republicans echoing President Donald Trump’s false claims that the 2020 presidential election was ridden with voter fraud have pushed for states to leave a bipartisan group that lets officials share data to keep voter rolls accurate. Nine have, but none since October 2023.

A new bill advanced Tuesday by House Republicans in a Georgia committee could make Georgia the 10th.

Twenty-four states and Washington, D.C., are currently members of the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, which Republicans have questioned over its funding and motives. Officials use state and federal data from the group to identify and remove from voting rolls people who have died, moved to other states or registered somewhere else.

Rep. Martin Momtahan, the Dallas Republican who introduced the bill, said states leaving the group, including many that border Georgia, have made the data and its network “totally ineffective.”

But Georgia Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has credited the system for helping him maintain accurate voter data, which officials say provides more robust information than states can gather on their own.

“ERIC is, in my opinion, the most secure and efficient mass voter list maintenance tool that is available,” Blake Evans, who works for Raffensperger and is the chair of ERIC’s executive committee, said during a Tuesday hearing on the bill.

Share this:

“Wisconsin Supreme Court dismisses Racine voting van lawsuit”

WPR:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s liberal majority has dismissed a lawsuit claiming a Racine mobile-voting van is illegal, ruling that the Republican man who filed the challenge didn’t have legal standing to do so.

The battle over the voting van dates back to 2022, when Racine City Clerk Tara McMenamin said it was a way to make voting accessible to as many people as possible during a primary. The van was purchased using money from a grant from the Center for Tech and Civic Life nonprofit, which is funded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife.

Former Racine County Republican Party Chair Kenneth Brown, who was represented by the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Elections Commission aimed at prohibiting McMenamin from using the voting van in future elections.

The elections commission dismissed Brown’s complaint, but a Racine County judge ruled in January 2024 that the voting van was illegal. The case was appealed, and the Supreme Court agreed to take it up directly, bypassing a state appeals court.

Writing for the liberal majority, Justice Jill Karofsky said Brown didn’t have legal standing to file his lawsuit because he didn’t show the elections commission’s dismissal of his complaint caused him any injury.

“Brown contends he was injured by WEC’s decision because WEC found no probable cause that the Racine City Clerk violated the law and therefore declined to take corrective action,” Karofsky said. “But Brown does not allege that WEC’s decision personally affected him.”

In her dissent, conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley accused liberal justices of misinterpreting state law on legal standing and leaving Wisconsin “without a decision on fundamental issues of election law enacted to protect their sacred right to vote.”…

Share this:

“The Trump Administration Is Going After Our Elections Too”

Larry Norden and Derek Tisler at Slate:

In its crusade against federal agencies, the Trump administration is targeting our election system, making potentially dangerous reductions to protections that help keep elections free, fair, and secure. On Friday, the acting director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency sent a memo to all agency staff notifying them that “all election security activities” would be paused pending the results of an internal investigation. The memo also stated that the administration was cutting off all funds to the Election Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center—a Department of Homeland Security–funded organization that helps state and local officials monitor, analyze, and respond to cyberattacks targeting the nation’s election hardware and software.

The work of CISA and the EI-ISAC has been central to election security in the United States for most of the past decade, providing state and local election officials with critical tools and assistance to defend against cyber and physical threats to election systems. These steps and other recent blows to federal election guardrails were foretold in Project 2025. Understanding the playbook will help us be ready to push back when the next shoes drop.

Share this:

Wisconsin: “Crawford, Schimel won’t pledge to recuse from cases involving political parties”

Wisconsin Public Radio:

With Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election on track to be the most expensive judiciary election in history, neither candidate has pledged to recuse themselves from hearing cases involving the political parties backing their races.

In an interview with WPR, liberal candidate Susan Crawford said that, much as she will not prejudge cases, she will also not prejudge the parties that bring them.

“I think it really comes down to, what kind of dispute is it? Who’s the other party in the case? What kind of legal issues are they raising? And only then make a decision about whether I could be fair and impartial in such a case or not,” she said at a campaign stop in western Wisconsin on Saturday.

That includes the state Democratic Party, she said, which has donated about $2 million in support of her campaign to date.

In a written statement, her conservative opponent, Brad Schimel, said he will set “personal history aside” when ruling, but he did not respond to questions about recusing from cases involving the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

“Before each case, I search my conscience and decide truthfully whether I can rule objectively. I will hold myself to that same process when I serve on the Wisconsin Supreme Court,” he said.

Schimel has received about $1.7 million from the state GOP….

Share this:

“NC elections officials seek to fast-track state Supreme Court race battle”

WRAL:

The North Carolina Board of Elections asked the state Supreme Court to use its power to bypass the state Court of Appeals and take up Republican Jefferson Griffin’s election challenge — a case that could determine whether Griffin wins a seat on the high court.

Griffin, currently a state appeals judge, finished the November general election more than 700 votes behind Democratic incumbent Justice Allison Riggs. The slim margin was upheld by two statewide recounts, but the result hasn’t been certified while Griffin challenges the eligibility of tens of thousands of voters….

A Feb. 7 hearing in Wake County Superior Court resulted in a ruling in the election board’s favor, denying Griffin’s request to throw out the challenged votes. Griffin has appealed that ruling.

In its petition to the Supreme Court, the state elections board says the case raises legal issues of “exceptional public importance,” and should be settled as soon as possible….

Share this: