Campaign Legal Center

Congress passed the STOCK Act in 2012 to increase transparency by requiring members to report stock trades, but the law failed to boost public confidence and instead generated negative headlines for late filings or trades through blind trusts. Examples include Rep. Tom Kean Jr., whose trades during health issues sparked criticism, and academic studies showing the law's limited impact on public trust.

The House Ethics Committee is investigating Rep. Lance Gooden, a four-term Texas Republican, following findings from the Office of Congressional Conduct referred on June 10. An update on the investigation is expected by November 9. A 2021 complaint by the Campaign Legal Center regarding unreported stock trades under the STOCK Act was sent to the OCC.

The House passed a stock trading bill prohibiting members of Congress from purchasing individual stocks, but the legislation exempts the president and allows lawmakers to retain existing stock holdings. Critics argue the bill fails to address conflicts of interest, while supporters call it a significant step toward restricting insider trading.

The House passed a bill prohibiting members of Congress from purchasing individual stocks, allowing retention of existing holdings but requiring public notice before selling. The legislation includes exemptions for the president and certain investments, and faces criticism for not addressing conflicts of interest fully. The bill also incorporates a voter identification requirement, sparking bipartisan opposition.

New recordings from Marsha Blackburn's U.S. Senate office allege pressure to break the law, including potential Hatch Act violations by using taxpayer resources for political campaigns. The Senate Ethics Committee investigated these claims, but Blackburn dismissed the complaint as politically motivated.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision removed spending limits for political parties, increasing their influence in key midterm elections. The ruling may strengthen party roles in campaigns, particularly in Senate races, though it may not significantly boost overall donations from large donors.

The U.S. Supreme Court's June 30 decision removed spending limits on political parties coordinating with candidates, potentially increasing their influence in key midterm races. Experts suggest this shift strengthens party roles in campaigns but may not significantly alter total spending, as super PACs already provide unlimited funds.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision removed limits on political parties' coordinated spending with candidates, potentially enhancing their influence in midterm elections. The ruling, which followed a 6-3 vote, could affect Senate races in states like Maine, Ohio, and Texas, though experts question if it will significantly increase overall campaign spending.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision removed limits on political parties' coordinated spending with candidates, potentially increasing their influence in midterm Senate races. Experts suggest this change may strengthen party roles but not necessarily lead to significant new funding surges, as super PACs already dominate spending.

Tennessee Congressman John Rose has asked U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn to release documents from a confidential Senate ethics investigation related to potential misuse of official resources in her political campaigns. Rose, competing against Blackburn for the GOP nomination for Tennessee governor, made the request in a letter, while Blackburn's office stated the matter was resolved with full cooperation. Previous ethics complaints against Blackburn include allegations of using legislative power for personal financial gain and another complaint five years ago.

U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn's office was investigated by the Senate Ethics Committee over allegations of using taxpayer funds for political campaigns. The probe included interviews with her staff about their interactions with campaign strategist Ward Baker and whether staff were pressured to engage in political activities using government resources. Blackburn's office confirmed the investigation but refused to release related correspondence.

The Supreme Court struck down federal limits on coordinated political party spending in a 6-3 decision, ruling they violate the First Amendment. The ruling, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, removes caps on party expenditures supporting candidates, with critics warning it could increase corruption and supporters calling it a victory for free speech.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that campaign finance limits on political parties violate the First Amendment, striking down coordinated spending limits between federal candidates and parties. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Elena Kagan dissented, warning of increased corruption risks. The decision, which affects the Federal Election Campaign Act, was supported by Republican officials and criticized by advocacy groups for enabling greater donor influence.

A record $48 million has been spent on U.S. House and Senate primaries by super PACs that delay donor disclosure until after elections, according to a POLITICO analysis. These groups exploit FEC deadlines to raise unlimited funds without revealing donors during critical election periods, with spending surpassing previous cycles by more than double compared to 2024 and tenfold compared to 2018.

A mysterious group spent $5 million on TV ads in the Michigan Senate primary, sparking suspicions of involvement by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or its super PAC affiliate. The true source of the ad campaign may not be known for months due to Federal Election Commission rules. Front groups are proliferating in the 2026 election cycle, with various industries using loopholes to obscure their identity.

A mystery group spent $5 million on TV ads in the Michigan Senate primary, sparking suspicions of involvement by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or its super PAC affiliate. The group's true source of funding may not be known for months due to Federal Election Commission rules. This is an example of how special interest groups are using loopholes to obscure their identity and influence elections.