Trump’s Sham Election Commission Wants to Operate in the Dark, but We’re Suing to Drag It Into the Sunlight

Despite requesting a staggering amount of sensitive data from every registered voter in the country, Donald Trump’s Election Integrity Commission intends to hold its next meeting behind closed doors, where the same registered voters will not be able to participate. That’s illegal, so yesterday the ACLU sued the president’s election commission under a federal law designed to ensure public accountability of advisory committees.

Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the commission is required to make all meetings open to the public, with enough notice to allow for in-person attendance. The commission must also make all written records, documents, and meeting minutes available. Most importantly, the commission must adopt measures to ensure that its work is not inappropriately influenced by special interests or the president himself.

Thus far, we’ve witnessed a total disregard for these requirements.

Demand transparency

The commission has already held an initial meeting without public notice, and it will not permit the public to attend its next meeting on July 19. Instead, it has offered an internet livestream, a paltry replacement for real public engagement. It’s a troubling lack of transparency, especially for a body seeking an enormous amount of access to sensitive information. Our suit comes at the heels of Kris Kobach’s overreaching request to all 50 states to email the commission sensitive data on every registered voter, including full names, the last four digits of Social Security numbers, party affiliation, and voting history.

Pushback was swift and colorful.

Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, a Republican, suggested that the commission “go jump in the Gulf of Mexico.” Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf, a Democrat, responded concerned that the “request is a mere pretense for pursuing restrictions on the fundamental right of citizens to vote.” Connecticut and California took issue with the individual record of the commission’s vice chair Kris Kobach, citing both a “lengthy record of illegally disenfranchising eligible voters in Kansas” and “a long history of sponsoring discriminatory, anti-immigrant policies including voter suppression and racial profiling laws.”

Election boards in multiple states heard from voters alarmed by the request. Ironically, the commission’s request alone was enough to suppress some votes: Both Colorado and North Carolina reported an uptick in voters canceling their registrations outright to prevent data from being shared.

It doesn’t end there, though.

More than 40 states refused to provide the commission with the full breadth of data it requested. Despite that, Kris Kobach and Vice President Mike Pence would have us believe that the commission’s request is routine and benign, suggesting its “fake news” that states are refusing to comply. President Trump has even suggested wrongdoing on behalf of officials who refused to hand over data, asking, “What are they trying to hide?”

We must be committed to flipping that question: No, Mr. President, what is your commission trying to hide?

Thus far, the commission has been deservedly met with skepticism and, as of yesterday, multiple court challenges including ours. In response, commission officials told state election officers to “hold on submitting any data.” This is a short-term victory but not a permanent solution.

This commission is only beginning its investigation, which every indication suggests will end in voter suppression. To protect voting rights, we must be prepared for the long fight, too.

Join our demand for transparency from the commission by signing our petition here.

View comments (114)
Read the Terms of Use


This is committees actions are deplorable! Yes some meeting on sensitive issues is acceptable. Issues that involve immediate life or death of agents or troops are and should be private. However, this issue is does not come even close to qualifying,

The congress and senate should act immediately to disband this group for good!

ps, I'd sign your petition but I don't want to be tracked.



Anna Chapman

Конечно, семья Трампа дала нам информацию. Мы дали им столько информации, сколько хотели. Мы вступаем в сговор с Trumps на выборах. Мы также вступаем в сговор с Бушем.


I'll fight them with my last breath! I'm in Kansas and just waiting to get these A$$holes out of the gov't.


This should all be completely public - and we should get to the bottom of the extensive voter-fraud that has become endemic to our electoral process. The problem is in the millions.


More people are struck by lightning or attacked by sharks than are accused of voter fraud.


Quick correction - Mississippi* Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, not Missouri


It was the Mississippi Secretary of State, not Missouri.

Eli Samuel Goldman

Well, it's already come out that Trump's son met with a lawyer for the Kremlin trying to "dig up dirt on Hillary" during the election. Now Trump denies connections to hackers, but how else would the Kremlin be able to even find "dirt" on Hillary Clinton but to either manufacture it, of get it via arranging to commission illegal spying on U.S. officials by a foreign government, which unquestionably constitute collusion during the election by his own family to commit espionage against our own government, which is TREASON! Now Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were put to death on June 19th, 1953 for doing sonething comoarable to what Donald Trump Jr did during the election. So why do articles say Trump Jr will face "no legal repercussions?" So we only execute Jews for espionage against the U.S. Government as the Trump family did, but not white supremicists like the Trump family? Even Whitehouse staff are distancing themselves to avoid self incrimination. I guess it's OK for a Trump to commit espionage and TREASON against the United States during the election in order to get elected. But just FYI, standard procedure in the U.S.A. would be to execute Donald Trump Jr for his actions and investigate the entire Trump family and any staffers involved independently of them, their party supporters and associations, then imprison after trial those found complicit.


No this is not comparable to the Rosenbergs, it's pretty bad but not the same. The Rosenbergs gave classified documents to the Soviets acting as explicit spies on the Communists behalf. The Rosenbers aren't even comparable to Manning. The Rosenbergs were influenced by monetary gain and traded the ultimate classified secrets of the day for a few dollars.

You post a lot of shit that often doesn't make sense under the pseudo name "Eli Goldman". Perhaps you work for the Russians?


Stay Informed