On Monday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a left-leaning government watchdog group, announced that as a result of its recent lawsuit, the government will have to turn over logs and records of individuals who visited Mar-a-Lago, President Trump’s Florida residence.

CREW filed the lawsuit alongside the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and the National Security Archive under the Freedom of Information Act. The group has been working to reveal visitor logs for the White House, Mar-a-Lago, and Trump Tower in New York City.

Currently, the Department of Homeland Security says it has no records of people visiting Trump Tower. The lawsuit regarding the White House records is ongoing.

“The public deserves to know who is coming to meet with the president and his staff,” CREW executive director Noah Bookbinder said in a statement. “We are glad as a result of this case, this information will become public for meetings at his personal residences–but it needs to be public for meetings at the White House as well.”

District Court Judge Katherine Polk Failla wrote in her ruling: “The Secret Service will complete its search for and processing of responsive ‘records of presidential visitors at Mar-a-Lago,’ and produce any non-exempt responsive records, by September 8, 2017.” CREW says it plans to share the information publicly once it’s released.

Amidst promises to “drain the swamp” and allegations of collusion with foreign officials, Trump’s poorly-disclosed private dealings have been at the heart of public debate in recent months.

The public has essentially been prevented from knowing which lobbyists, political donors, and others the president is meeting with behind closed doors, making it difficult to fully comprehend Trump’s allegiances and stances on issues.

The Mar-a-Lago visitor logs may prove to be revelatory because of the unique role the estate has played since Trump took office. In a sense, Mar-a-Lago, which the president affectionately refers to as the “Southern White House,” best represents Trump: a mix of his gold-plated private life, his business ties, and now, his executive power.

The venue has controversially served as the backdrop for high-profile diplomatic visits with foreign leaders as well as numerous costly golf weekends for the president.

This lawsuit is not CREW’s first attempt to compel transparency from the White House. The group also sued the Obama Administration, which agreed to release White House visitor logs as part of a settlement. That effort began during the Bush Administration before it was settled with President Obama. Since 2009, about 6 million visitor records were made public.

In April, the Trump Administration announced it would end this practice, citing “grave national security risks.” Currently, the website where the logs were previously published is blank and reads: “Thank you for your interest in this subject. Stay tuned as we continue to update whitehouse.gov.”

Celia Heudebourg

Celia Heudebourg is an editorial intern for Law Street Media. She is from Paris, France and is entering her senior year at Macalester College in Minnesota where she studies international relations and political science. When she’s not reading or watching the news, she can be found planning a trip abroad or binge-watching a good Netflix show. Contact Celia at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Judge Orders Trump to Release Mar-a-Lago Visitor Logs appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

The Health Care Bill Goes from Dying to Dead

The outlook for the Senate Republican health care bill hasn’t been particularly rosy since its introduction. But things got even worse for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell last night, when two more senators said they wouldn’t be voting for it. Senators Mike Lee of Utah and Jerry Moran of Kansas both said they oppose moving forward with the bill, joining Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky in their opposition.

After the news broke, McConnell said he would call for a vote to repeal Obamacare now, and come up with a replacement later. While that may appeal to far-right defectors like Paul, Lee, and Moran, it is sure to concern more moderate Republicans who want to ensure that things like Medicaid funding stay in place. For example, Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia–often cited as a potential to vote against the Senate health care bill in the first place–has already said she’s not in favor of that strategy. And President Donald Trump is blaming the Democrats for the bill’s failure…despite the fact that had all the Republicans in the Senate banded together, the bill could have passed.

We were let down by all of the Democrats and a few Republicans. Most Republicans were loyal, terrific & worked really hard. We will return!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 18, 2017

With only a very small majority, the Republicans in the House & Senate need more victories next year since Dems totally obstruct, no votes!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 18, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 18, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

To boost recruitment, the Secret Service is altering its drug policy: now, applicants who have used marijuana at some point in their past can still be considered for a position. An initiative by newly appointed director Randolph Alles, who President Donald Trump appointed to the post at the end of April, the policy change is designed to infuse the agency with a couple thousand more officers. The policy went into effect last month.

“We need more people,” Alles said in a press conference last Thursday. “The mission has changed.” Pointing to threats like international terrorism, groups like al Qaeda and Islamic State, and homegrown actors, he added: “It’s more dynamic and way more dangerous than it has been in years past.”

According to its drug policy statement, the Secret Service “does not condone any prior unlawful drug activity by applicants, but it is recognized that some otherwise qualified applicants may have used or otherwise interacted with illegal drugs at some point in their past.” When examining an applicant’s eligibility, “any prior illegal drug activity along with various considerations associated with that activity will be weighed in that adjudication process.” the statement says.

The agency’s prior policy disqualified candidates who had used marijuana more than a certain number of times at some point in their pasts. The new policy, designed to be a “whole-person concept,” Alles said, will instead look at the time between an applicant’s last use of marijuana, and his or her application date.

For instance, if an applicant was 24-years-old or younger when he or she last used or purchased marijuana, they must wait at least a year before applying to the agency. That standard rises as the age of last use or purchase rises.

Alles, who previously led air and marine missions with Customs and and Border Protections, also underlined a non-terrorism related reality that is requiring the agency to bolster its ranks: the round-the-clock protection of Trump and his family, as well as his collection of properties, including Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach and Trump Tower in Manhattan.

“I think between that and the fact that he has a larger family, that’s just more stress on the organization,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New Secret Service Director Loosens Agency’s Drug Policy appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

White House Criticized for Promoting Mar-a-Lago

In a blog post from April 4, the U.S. State Department promoted Mar-a-Lago as “Trump’s Florida estate,” and claimed that by visiting “this ‘winter White House,’ Trump is belatedly fulfilling the dream of Mar-a-Lago’s original owner and designer.” After Trump was elected president, the Florida resort doubled its membership fee to $200,000. The blog post received renewed attention on Monday after it was featured on the website of the U.S. embassy in London, as well as several other U.S. embassies. Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden asked on Twitter why taxpayer money is “promoting the president’s private country club.” President Obama’s chief ethics attorney, Norman Eisen, called it “exploitation” and said that this behavior needs to be stopped. Eisen is also part of a group of attorneys who have already sued Trump for an alleged violation of the emoluments clause, which states that a president can’t accept gifts or payments from foreign states without approval from Congress.

Yes, I am curious @StateDept. Why are taxpayer $$ promoting the President’s private country club? pic.twitter.com/IlPhUlvMwa

— Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) April 24, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 25, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Sexual Abuse by Boarding School Teachers Went on For Decades

A report released yesterday revealed that some teachers at the elite boarding school Choate Rosemary Hall in Connecticut sexually abused their students for decades. The report names 12 teachers who abused students, including through “forced or coerced intercourse,” starting in the 1960s and continuing until the 2010s. The school failed to report the crimes to the police or take appropriate action in almost all of the cases–for example, one Spanish teacher raped a 17-year-girl in a swimming pool during a school trip to Costa Rica in 1999. He then went on to become principal at another school, where he worked until last week.

Report names 12 at Choate Rosemary Hall who allegedly abused students https://t.co/3Y1bLAQuGu pic.twitter.com/USTfSz0UGX

— Boston.com (@BostonDotCom) April 14, 2017

The prestigious school boasts alums like President John F. Kennedy and his brother Joseph. Lawyer Paul Mones, who represents sexual abuse survivors, said that the logistics of a private boarding school makes it significantly easier for abuse to happen. “They are closed systems, especially residential private schools where kids are separated from their parents,” he said.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 14, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

The latest from a series of investigative reports by The Washington Post reveals Donald Trump used over $250,000 of his charity’s funds to finance legal settlements tied to his businesses. The cases seem to indicate the Republican presidential nominee broke U.S. self-dealing laws, which, if the IRS finds him guilty of doing, could require him to pay penalty taxes as well as reimburse the Donald J. Trump Foundation for the money he pilfered for personal expenditures.

For example, in 2007, the town of Palm Beach, Florida began fining Trump’s beachfront Mar-a-Lago property over $1,000 per day because it flouted a town ordinance stating flagpoles could reach no higher than 42 feet. Trump erected an American flag standing 80 feet high. Palm Beach settled the issue by requiring Trump to make a $100,000 donation to the Fisher House charity, which benefits veterans and their families. Trump sent the charity a check for the proposed amount. Examining his charity’s tax filings, the Post found that the check used funds from the Donald J. Trump Foundation.

A previous Post investigation found Trump hardly contributes to his own charity so, in effect, he used contributions from other donors to fund some legal disputes. There was a second major case in which Trump seemingly dug into his foundation’s coffers for settlement money: in 2010, during a charity tournament at Trump’s golf course in Westchester County, New York, a man hit a hole-in-one on the 13th hole, a feat promising a $1 million prize. But the fine print of the rules rendered Martin Greenberg, the man who hit the hole-in-one, prize-less. He sued. Trump’s course settled with Greenberg, who demanded Trump donate to his charity, the Martin Greenberg Foundation. Trump sent a check of $158,000 from his own foundation.

A real headline about the Republican nominee: “Trump used $258,000 from his charity to settle legal problems.” https://t.co/2LRtZB3Ri2

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) September 21, 2016

IRS self-dealing laws include the following language: “Paying compensation or reimbursing expenses by a private foundation to a disqualified person is generally an act of self-dealing.” At the moment, the New York attorney general’s office is looking into Trump’s actions to determine if he broke the state’s charity laws.

There are other instances where Trump used his foundation’s money to fund personal items: $5,000 toward ads for his hotel chains in 2013, $10,000 for a portrait of himself in 2014, and $12,000 for a football helmet signed by former NFL player Tim Tebow in 2012.

Trump’s campaign issued a statement on Tuesday night, saying the Post had “gotten their facts wrong,” and wrote the story as a way of directing attention away from the “corrupt Clinton Foundation.” The statement went on: “There was not, and could not be, any intent or motive for the Trump Foundation to make improper payments. All contributions are reported to the IRS, and all Foundation donations are publicly disclosed.” It is unclear what the Post story got wrong, and what “inaccuracies and omissions” it contained. The statement did not make any specific references, while calling the man who wrote the story, David Fahrenthold, a “biased reporter.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Did Donald Trump Use His Foundation’s Money to Settle Legal Disputes? appeared first on Law Street.