Common Cause

An increasing number of partisan poll watchers and nonpartisan election observers are present at polling places, raising concerns about voter confusion and intimidation. Voting rights advocates warn this could undermine trust in the November midterm elections, with political parties blaming each other for the situation.

Political party poll watchers are increasing at polling places, raising concerns about voter confusion and intimidation. Nonpartisan election observers and voting rights advocates warn this could erode trust in the process, while political parties blame each other for the issue.

Political party poll watchers are increasing at polling places, raising concerns about voter confusion and trust in the election process. Nonpartisan observers worry their role in ensuring fair voting is being overshadowed by partisan efforts, while parties blame each other for undermining election integrity.

An increasing number of partisan poll watchers and nonpartisan election observers are present at polling locations, raising concerns about voter confusion and erosion of trust in the election process. Political parties and advocacy groups attribute the conflict to each other's efforts to influence or monitor elections.

An increasing number of political party poll watchers are appearing at polling places, raising concerns about voter confusion between partisan observers and nonpartisan monitors. Voting rights advocates warn this could erode trust in the election process, while political parties blame each other for the situation.

Political party poll watchers are increasing in number, raising concerns about voter confusion and trust in the election process. Nonpartisan election monitors trained by advocacy groups like Common Cause aim to ensure fair voting, while political parties accuse each other of undermining election integrity. The article highlights tensions over poll monitoring practices and their impact on public confidence.

Political party poll watchers are increasing at polling places, raising concerns about voter confusion and trust in the November midterm elections. Nonpartisan election observers fear their role in ensuring fair processes may be conflated with partisan efforts to intimidate voters. Partisan groups and voting rights advocates blame each other for the growing tensions.

Political party poll watchers are increasing at polling places, causing concerns about voter confusion and trust in the election process. Both parties blame each other for the situation, with advocates fearing a breakdown in credibility. Common Cause and other groups train nonpartisan observers to ensure proper procedures.

Partisan poll watchers are increasing at polling places, raising concerns about voter confusion and intimidation. Nonpartisan election monitors, like those trained by Common Cause, aim to ensure transparency, while political parties blame each other for election process tensions. President Donald Trump's claims about election vulnerabilities have influenced policies affecting voter ID requirements and poll integrity measures.

A Justice Department attorney asked a court to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s anti-weaponization fund, arguing the fund is non-operational and no money has been transferred. The lawsuit, led by Andrew Floyd and organizations like National Abortion Federation, alleges the fund could enable payouts to individuals involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Judge Leonie Brinkema has blocked the fund but awaits declarations from officials denying its implementation.

The Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit seeking to block the state from sharing voter data with the U.S. Department of Justice, ruling the case moot after the data was already released. The case, brought by Common Cause and a voter, was previously denied standing in a lower court before the state complied with the federal request for voter registration information.

Governor Ron DeSantis vetoed a bill allowing high school students to volunteer at polling locations, citing concerns about potential violations of a state law prohibiting single-party poll workers. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and other organizations supported the legislation, which passed unanimously in both chambers of the Florida legislature.

A lawsuit filed by voter advocacy groups challenges Colorado Springs' April city elections, alleging they create racial disparities in voter turnout. The groups argue off-cycle elections disproportionately suppress Black and Hispanic voter participation, violating the Colorado Voting Rights Act. City leaders, including Mayor Yemi Mobolade, defend the city's right to hold off-cycle elections under home rule governance.

Transparency groups ACLU of Massachusetts, Common Cause, and Massachusetts Newspaper Publishers Association supported a bill addressing public records requirements for lawmakers but avoided commenting on its controversial provision limiting the state auditor's power to audit the Legislature. The bill, criticized by Auditor Diana DiZoglio, combined both issues, leading to confusion among observers and criticism from transparency advocates not consulted during its drafting.

A federal judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction halting President Donald Trump's $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to sign a formal agreement confirming its dissolution. The judge cited concerns about the fund's potential use to pay Trump supporters, including individuals involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, which led to multiple lawsuits.

A federal judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction halting President Donald Trump's $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to confirm its dissolution. The fund, created in exchange for Trump dropping a lawsuit against the IRS, faced legal challenges over concerns it would support individuals involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

A federal judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction halting President Donald Trump’s $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to sign a written agreement confirming its dissolution. The fund, created in exchange for Trump dropping a lawsuit against the IRS, faces legal challenges from plaintiffs including a former Department of Justice prosecutor and a protester, represented by Democracy Forward and Common Cause.

A federal judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction halting Trump's $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to sign a formal agreement confirming its dissolution. The fund, created in exchange for Trump dropping a lawsuit against the IRS, faces legal challenges from groups including Democracy Forward and Common Cause, who argue it could fund individuals involved in the 2021 Capitol riot.

A federal judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction halting Trump's $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to sign a formal agreement confirming its dissolution. The fund, created in exchange for Trump dropping a lawsuit against the IRS, faces legal challenges from plaintiffs including a former DOJ prosecutor and a protester, represented by Democracy Forward and Common Cause.

A federal judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Donald Trump's $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to confirm its dissolution in writing. The fund, created in exchange for Trump dropping a lawsuit against the IRS, faces legal challenges from plaintiffs including a former DOJ prosecutor and a protester, represented by Democracy Forward and Common Cause, over concerns it could support individuals involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

A federal judge in Virginia issued a preliminary injunction halting Trump’s $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to confirm its dissolution. The fund, created in exchange for Trump dropping a lawsuit against the IRS, faces lawsuits over concerns it could pay individuals involved in the 2021 Capitol riot.

A federal judge blocked the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to sign a 'clear, unambiguous' agreement confirming its dissolution. Plaintiffs include a former Department of Justice Jan. 6 prosecutor and a protester, represented by Democracy Forward and Common Cause, who argue the fund could pay Trump supporters involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

A federal judge in Virginia blocked President Trump’s $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund for one week, requiring the government to sign an agreement confirming its dissolution. The fund, created by the Department of Justice in exchange for Trump dropping his lawsuit against the IRS, faces lawsuits from plaintiffs including a former DOJ prosecutor and a protester, represented by Democracy Forward and Common Cause.

U.S. Senate Democrats and police officers who defended the Capitol during the Jan. 6 insurrection opposed the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund. The fund, part of a deal after Trump dropped an IRS lawsuit, faces Democratic amendments as Senate Republicans struggle to pass an immigration bill.

Senate Democrats, including Dick Durbin, and former Capitol Police officers criticized the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund. The fund, part of a settlement tied to Trump’s IRS lawsuit, faces opposition from Democrats and legal challenges by officers who defended the Capitol during the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Senate Democrats and police officers who responded to the Jan. 6 insurrection opposed the Trump administration's $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund at a press conference. The fund, announced by the Department of Justice as part of a settlement with Trump's IRS lawsuit, is criticized as a 'slush fund' by Democrats, who plan to propose amendments to restrict it if Senate Republicans advance their immigration bill.

Senate Democrats and police officers who defended the Capitol during the Jan. 6 insurrection opposed the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund. The fund, linked to a lawsuit against the IRS, emerged as Senate Republicans struggled to pass an immigration bill. Democrats plan to introduce amendments to restrict the fund’s use.

U.S. Senate Democrats and former Capitol Police officers criticized the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund during a press conference, organized by Public Citizen and Common Cause, as Senate Republicans struggled to pass an immigration bill. The fund, announced by the Department of Justice, was part of a settlement involving a lawsuit against the IRS and grants immunity to Trump and his family from government inquiries.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from proceeding with a $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization fund' amid a lawsuit challenging its legality. The fund, created as part of a settlement over leaked tax returns, is accused of violating constitutional rights and congressional authority by plaintiffs including a former federal prosecutor and a professor.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration's 'anti-weaponization fund,' which aims to pay individuals claiming wrongdoing by past administrations. The block follows a lawsuit alleging the fund violates constitutional rights and congressional authority, with a hearing scheduled for June 12.

A U.S. judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration's Justice Department from operating a $1.778 billion 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' designed to compensate Americans targeted by federal investigations. The block follows a lawsuit by plaintiffs including a former prosecutor, a professor, and organizations like Common Cause and the National Abortion Federation, who argue the fund could incentivize violence and misuse public funds.

A U.S. judge temporarily blocked the Justice Department from operating a $1.778 billion 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' created by the Trump administration to compensate individuals allegedly targeted by politicized investigations. The block follows a lawsuit by plaintiffs including a former prosecutor and groups opposing the fund, with a hearing scheduled for June 12.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from proceeding with a $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization fund' critics argue benefits political allies. The fund, established via a settlement in a Trump lawsuit over leaked tax returns, faces legal challenges alleging constitutional violations. Judge Leonie Brinkema halted disbursements pending a June 12 hearing.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration's 'anti-weaponization fund' after plaintiffs argued it violates constitutional rights and congressional authority. The fund, part of a settlement over leaked tax returns, aims to pay individuals claiming harm from past administrations. Judge Leonie Brinkema halted disbursements pending a June 12 hearing.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from advancing a $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization fund' created as part of a settlement over leaked tax returns. The fund, overseen by a board selected by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, faces legal challenges from a former prosecutor and a professor, represented by Democracy Forward and Common Cause, who argue it violates constitutional rights and congressional authority.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration's 'anti-weaponization fund' while legal challenges continue. The fund, part of a $1.8 billion settlement from a tax return leak lawsuit, aims to compensate individuals claiming harm from past administrations. A lawsuit by a former prosecutor and a professor, supported by Democracy Forward and Common Cause, alleges the fund violates constitutional rights and congressional authority.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from advancing a $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund, which opponents argue could be used to pay political allies. The fund, created via a settlement in a lawsuit over leaked tax returns, is now halted pending a hearing on June 12, with plaintiffs alleging constitutional violations.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration's 'anti-weaponization fund' while legal challenges continue. The fund, created as part of a settlement over leaked tax return information, is accused of violating constitutional rights and congressional authority by plaintiffs including a former prosecutor and a professor. The judge's order halts disbursements until a June 12 hearing.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s 'anti-weaponization fund' while legal challenges proceed. The fund, part of a settlement from a lawsuit over leaked tax returns, aims to pay individuals claiming past administrations wronged them. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit argue the fund violates constitutional rights and congressional authority.

A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration's 'anti-weaponization fund', which opponents argue could pay political allies. The fund, created via a settlement over leaked tax returns, is challenged in a lawsuit alleging constitutional violations. A hearing is set for June 12 to address the block.