Trump's Feca Violations: Illegal Fundraising And Payment Solicitation

Former US President Donald Trump has been accused of violating several FEC laws. In 2024, the Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint against Trump for violating the soft money ban by transferring $20 million from his leadership PAC to the super PAC Make America Great Again, Inc.. The FEC deadlocked on the decision and took no action, despite evidence suggesting that Trump violated campaign finance laws. In another instance, Trump attempted to illegally fire US Federal Election Commission (FEC) Commissioner and Chair Ellen Weintraub by sending her a letter of removal. Additionally, Trump's campaign during the 2020 election was accused of masking how it was spending cash, with payments made to companies tied to his former campaign manager, Brad Parscale. While the FEC did not pursue this case, it does not absolve Trump of any wrongdoing. These incidents highlight legal questions surrounding Trump's actions and the FEC's ability to hold him accountable.

FEC complaint filed against Trump for violating soft money ban

The Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in November 2022, alleging that former President Donald Trump and his leadership PAC, Save America, violated the Federal Election Campaign Act's (FECA) soft money provisions. The CLC alleged that Trump transferred $20 million in soft money from Save America to the super PAC "Make America Great Again, Inc.," which spent millions to influence the 2022 midterm elections and support his 2024 presidential campaign.

Soft money refers to funds raised and spent on federal elections that do not comply with federal campaign finance laws and are not subject to federal reporting or contribution limits. The CLC's complaint argues that Trump's actions violated FECA's soft money prohibitions, which are in place to maintain transparency, combat corruption, and prevent a "pay-to-play" style of politics.

According to the CLC, Trump's public statements and activities indicate his intention to run for president again in 2024, making him a federal candidate under FECA at the time of the transfer. As a federal candidate, Trump was subject to FECA's soft money restrictions, and his actions constitute a violation of federal campaign finance laws.

The CLC has called on the FEC to enforce federal law and hold Trump and Save America accountable for their actions. Trevor Potter, president of the CLC and a former Republican Chairman of the FEC, emphasized the importance of upholding campaign finance laws to maintain transparency and voter trust.

In a separate case, the CLC also filed a complaint in 2019 alleging that Trump's 2016 campaign committee and the Donald J. Trump Foundation violated federal campaign finance law by soliciting and spending soft money funds in connection with his 2016 presidential run.

Trump's attempt to illegally fire US Federal Election Commission Chair

On February 6, 2025, Ellen Weintraub, the chairwoman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), received a letter from President Donald Trump stating that she had been "removed" from her position, effective immediately. Weintraub, a Democrat who has served as a commissioner on the FEC since 2002, asserted that the action was illegal and that there was a legal process for replacing FEC commissioners that Trump had not followed.

In her response to the letter, Weintraub stated, "There's a legal way to replace FEC commissioners—this isn't it." She also noted that FEC commissioners are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, and by law, no more than three commissioners can be from the same political party. Additionally, at least four votes are required for any official commission action.

Weintraub's term as commissioner had expired in 2007, but she had continued to serve on the board as the position of chair rotates annually. She assumed the chair position again in January 2025. According to Weintraub, a commissioner can only be removed when a replacement is nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Trump's letter did not name a successor, and it would likely take weeks for his choice of commissioner to be approved by the Senate.

Trevor Potter, a former commissioner and chairman of the FEC, also denounced the move to fire Weintraub, stating that it would violate the constitutional separation of powers. He emphasized that the FEC was intentionally created as an independent, bipartisan federal agency, and Congress did not grant the president the power to fire commissioners.

President Trump's attempt to fire Weintraub was part of a broader government makeover, which included firing and sidelining hundreds of civil servants and top officials at various agencies to downsize the bureaucracy and install loyalists.

Trump's buyout program potentially violating the Anti-Deficiency Act

In February 2025, the Trump administration proposed a "fork in the road" offer to federal workers, giving them the option to resign and get paid for eight months. This proposal, also known as the "buyout" or "deferred resignation" offer, was part of a broader plan to overhaul the federal government and reduce its size, which Trump blamed for hindering his agenda during his first term.

The buyout offer sparked widespread criticism and accusations that it potentially violated the Anti-Deficiency Act. More than two million federal employees were given a deadline of February 8, 2025, to accept the offer. However, unions, former officials, and others advised workers not to take the deal, arguing that it was illegal and lacked proper authorization from Congress. They also questioned whether there was a guarantee that employees would receive the promised payouts.

The White House defended the offer, stating that it had been thoroughly vetted by lawyers and was not an attempt to coerce resignations. They characterized the proposal as an opportunity for employees to take administrative leave without needing additional salary approval from Congress. The administration also emphasized that the offer was in line with Trump's campaign promise to restructure the federal government and reduce wasteful spending.

On February 7, 2025, U.S. District Judge George O'Toole temporarily blocked the Trump administration's buyout program, responding to a legal challenge filed by labor unions. The ruling came just before the deadline, as over 60,000 federal employees had already accepted the offer. The judge's decision was a preliminary win for the unions, and a hearing was scheduled for the following Monday to further consider the legality of the buyout proposal.

Trump's granting of sensitive data access to Elon Musk's team

In 2025, President Donald Trump granted Elon Musk's team access to sensitive data, allowing them to take control of the U.S. government's human resources agency and its computer systems. This move raised serious concerns about data privacy and cybersecurity.

Trump tasked Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla and X, with slashing the size of the civilian government workforce, which led to the sidelining and firing of hundreds of civil servants. Aides to Musk locked workers out of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) computer systems, preventing access to personal data, such as dates of birth, Social Security numbers, appraisals, home addresses, pay grades, and length of service.

The actions by Musk's team caused concern due to the lack of oversight and potential cybersecurity risks. There were also worries about congressional oversight at the agency and how Trump and Musk viewed the federal bureaucracy. The normal dry wording of government memos was eschewed in favor of encouraging civil servants to take buyouts and go on vacation.

The granting of access to sensitive data by the Trump administration led to a lawsuit by several unions representing federal employees. The lawsuit was filed against the Treasury Department for granting Musk and his non-government agents access to a sensitive system containing personal and financial information of millions of Americans. The unions argued that this violated federal laws protecting sensitive information from "improper disclosure and misuse."

The lawsuit specifically named Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who ousted the official in charge of the Bureau of Fiscal Service, which controls the flow of over $6 trillion annually in the U.S., including Social Security, Medicare, salaries for federal personnel, and tax refunds.

The granting of access to sensitive data by Trump to Musk's team caused widespread concern and led to legal action, highlighting the potential risks to data privacy and cybersecurity.

Trump's hush money campaign finance issues

In 2023, former US President Donald Trump was indicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records arising from a hush money payment to a porn actor during his 2016 election campaign. The Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, stated that Trump had falsified internal business records at his company about a payoff to a porn actor to keep a potentially damaging story from coming to light during his campaign.

The hush money payment was made to the actor, Stormy Daniels, to the value of $130,000, which exceeded the federal cap on campaign contributions. The indictment also stated that Trump had conspired to "undermine the integrity of the 2016 election" through a series of hush money payments designed to silence claims that could be harmful to his candidacy.

Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, was also implicated in the case. Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to lying to Congress about the payment to Daniels and to campaign finance violations and other charges in connection to the hush money payments. Cohen has admitted that Trump directed him to arrange the payment to fend off damage to his presidential bid.

In addition to the payment to Daniels, there was another alleged hush money scheme involving American Media, Inc. (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer. AMI made a $150,000 "catch and kill" payment for the rights to a story by former Playboy model Karen McDougal about her alleged affair with Trump. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) received complaints about this payment, and their non-partisan attorneys recommended finding reason to believe that Trump and others had violated campaign finance law. However, the investigation was blocked by Republican commissioners, who cited "prosecutorial discretion" as their reason.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to all 34 felony counts and has called the case a "political persecution". He was sentenced without penalty in the New York hush money case, with the judge citing the "extraordinary legal protections" afforded to the office of the presidency as the reason for not imposing any punishment. Trump has indicated that he will appeal the conviction.

Frequently asked questions