AG: Benson gubernatorial announcement in public building violated campaign finance act
The secretary of state's use of a government building – one that houses the department she oversees – to announce her candidacy for governor violated Michigan's campaign finance laws, the Department of Attorney General said Monday.
That said, the department noted it did not have the authority to impose any civil penalties against Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, nor any criminal penalties outlined in the law.
Benson jumped into the 2026 gubernatorial ring on January 22 with a press conference held in the lobby of the Austin building. Benson said then that the announcement was being held inside the building due to the cold weather. Reporters at the event questioned whether other candidates could also use the lobby for similar announcements, with some noting that other candidates had not been allowed to do so in the past.
Benson says she's focused on 'efficiency and transparency' in Michigan governor campaign
Benson told reporters that other candidates could use the lobby if they'd like to announce their campaigns – which led to complaints from Republicans.
In a letter sent to Benson on Monday, Joshua Booth, chief of the opinions division with the Department of Attorney General, said the secretary of state had violated a portion of the Michigan Campaign Finance Act.
That said, Booth wrote that the Jocelyn Benson for Governor campaign committee had not violated the law because it was not a public body and because there was no allegation that the campaign committee was acting on behalf of a government body.
The act prohibits candidates from using public funds, personnel, office space, equipment and other property paid for by public resources. In that regard, Booth said Benson herself violated the act.
'Secretary Benson invited members of the press inside the Austin Building and then conducted a press conference, professionally dressed, during the day, in the lobby of the building that houses her office,' Booth wrote. 'She gave no indication that would lead a reasonable person viewing the press conference to believe that she was there on her 'personal time.' Instead, the circumstances would lead a reasonable person to believe that Secretary Benson was acting as secretary of state with the authority of the Department of State, which is a 'public body,' to invite members of the press inside her office building and use the lobby for the press conference.'
As to Benson's belief that other candidates could also use the Austin building to announce their candidacy, the law does allow for the use of public buildings for campaign events or candidate announcements. But Booth said her belief was misplaced because the Department of Technology, Management and Budget oversees the building, and therefore, the facility was not one that any candidate or committee had an equal opportunity to use.
Benson's committee also raised First Amendment concerns, and argued that any violation of the act enforced against it would in turn violate her constitutional rights. But Booth said limiting candidates from using the building was a legitimate purpose because such a gathering could interfere with the entering, exiting and the general business of those working inside the building.
A violation of the act carries a civil penalty of a fine not more than $1,000 imposed by the Department of State and a conciliation process helps determine the amount of the fine. If an agreement cannot be reached, the Department of State can refer the matter to the attorney general's office.
The act is, however, silent on how the Department of Attorney General should resolve a complaint against the Secretary of State if it's determined that a violation occurred. Booth said there are no provisions establishing a conciliation process, other informal method of resolving the complaint, or giving authority to the attorney general's office to order a hearing or issue a civil fine following a hearing. There is also no provision allowing the secretary of state to appeal a fine imposed by the Department of Attorney General.
The same goes for criminal penalties, Booth said. The act states that anyone in violation of Michigan campaign finance law is guilty of a misdemeanor, but because the complaint was referred to the attorney general by the secretary of state, the attorney general's office lacks the authority to charge Benson with a misdemeanor.
Booth said that it may sound odd and seem unfair that Benson is subject to the Campaign Finance Act's rules but none of its penalties, but the Legislature never expressly gave the attorney general the authority to enforce the law against a secretary of state.
'Consequently, the attorney general is left with no choice but to simply identify the violation, remind the secretary of state of her obligations under the MCFA, and warn her against violating them in the future,' Booth wrote. 'That said, it is by no means unusual for the Secretary of State to resolve campaign finance complaints with a similar reminder and warning. … Under the circumstances, resolving these complaints with a reminder and warning is the appropriate sanction, but it is also important to take this opportunity to point out the lack of enforcement options available to the attorney general under the current language of the MCFA.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
‘Wanna-be king': Democrats fume at Trump move to oust BLS head
Criticism is mounting after President Trump moved to oust the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on Friday following a dismal jobs report. Trump accused BLS commissioner Erika McEntarfer, an appointee of former President Biden, of skewing job numbers in the latest report, which showed the U.S. adding only 73,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate increasing slightly. Revisions in the report also showed that the U.S. added 258,000 fewer jobs in May and June than the Labor Department first reported, according to BLS data. 'In my opinion, today's Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad,' he wrote on Truth Social. Later, he called for McEntarfer's ouster, which sparked some backlash on Capitol Hill. 'Instead of helping people get good jobs, Donald Trump just fired the statistician who reported bad jobs data that the wanna-be king doesn't like,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) posted on social platform X. The gloomy jobs report raised serious questions about the strength of the U.S. economy, especially in light of Trump's sweeping tariffs, which have caused anxieties in the global market. Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) called the president's response 'deeply irresponsible.' 'Firing the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because they accurately report on your struggling economy isn't just corrupt, it's deeply irresponsible,' she wrote online. 'Undermining our economic data is only going to create further chaos and uncertainty for our businesses big and small.' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also turned the tables back on Trump in a semi-mocking post on X. 'BREAKING: I did some research into Trump's Deep State and found this photo of the real government employee responsible for the job loss numbers,' Schumer wrote Friday, sharing a photo of the president himself. 'Trump must fire him immediately.' Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) reacted with an equally biting post, offering her version of the timeline. She wrote on X, 'Step one: Trump tanks the economy. Step two: Data shows that Trump is tanking the economy. Step three: Trump fires the person who puts out economic data so that in the future, no one will know he's still tanking the economy.' Sen. Tammy Baldwin also weighed in, writing on social media that 'Donald Trump has thrown our economy into chaos and is firing the messenger for telling us.' Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) also took a swing at the president for his reaction, calling it 'one more step toward authoritarianism.' 'Truth being replaced by propaganda. This is what the Soviets did. This is a big deal, and we need to act like it,' Murphy wrote on X, alongside a video message. 'Time for a fight.' Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) pressed her GOP colleagues to denounce Trump's firing of the top statistician. 'It is seriously dangerous territory when Trump fires anyone who doesn't cook the books for him. The entire economy hinges on the accurate, nonpartisan data we get from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,' she wrote online. 'Republicans need to join us in fighting to protect the integrity of BLS.' Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who is retiring at the end of his term, placed blame for the dismal report on Trump's trade agenda. The comment came as the latest iteration of 'reciprocal' tariffs on dozens of countries was set to go into effect Friday. 'President Trump fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because he didn't like that the jobs report was weak—a direct result of his chaotic trade wars,' he wrote. 'Utterly reckless, and a chilling reminder of his autocratic tendencies.' Despite the criticism, Trump's allies have largely stood behind his decision to sack McEntarfer, who has served in the post since 2023. The president also accused the BLS chief of fabricating jobs numbers ahead of the 2024 presidential election to 'boost' former Vice President Harris's chances of winning. A BLS spokesperson, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed to The Hill that McEntarfer was let go. Deputy commissioner William Wiatrowski is set to serve as acting head until the administration finds a replacement.
9 minutes ago
Democratic governors throw support behind Newsom, back partisan redistricting
MADISON, Wisc. -- -- A number of high-profile Democratic governors are ready to fight -- ardently throwing support behind their colleagues who have said they will draw new Congressional maps to favor Democrats before the 2026 midterm elections in order to directly counter Texas Republicans' moves to do the same for their party. Texas GOP lawmakers just this week released their first draft of the state's new congressional map that could flip three to five Democratic seats in next year's midterms. On Thursday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom promptly responded, saying he'd spoken with state legislators and members of Congress about holding a special statewide election on Nov. 4 for Californians to vote on new congressional maps -- ones that would likely favor Democrats. Convening later in the week for a summer policy retreat on the shores of Madison, Wisconsin, a number of leading Democratic governors have backed Newsom and any other blue state leaders who are taking an offensive position on redistricting. The Democrats each did so reluctantly, calling Texas Republicans' efforts "unconstitutional' and 'un-American' with hopes that the courts intervene before any new maps steered by either party are implemented. In the meantime, they said it's time to fight against the Trump-championed GOP redistricting, especially now that other Republican-led states, including Missouri, might follow suit. 'That is so un-American, and it's a constant threat to our democracy,' Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said about Republican proposals. 'So I'm really pissed, frankly, and we are going to do whatever we can do to stop this from happening.' Gov. Laura Kelly of Kansas, the Chair of the Democratic Governors Association, explicitly got behind Newsom, Kathy Hochul of New York, JB Pritzker of Illinois and any other governors who are weighing counteraction through special elections, special sessions or additional means of redrawing congressional maps. 'I have never believed in unilateral disarmament, and so while I may not want to participate in certain activities, if I have to, in order to level the playing field, I would support my Democratic colleagues who decide to answer in kind,' Kelly said in an interview. 'If the other side is going to pursue this, regardless of the obvious unconstitutionality of it, then I don't think we have any other choice but to go there. You just don't go to the front lines without your bullets,' Kelly said. Kelly said her strong 'preference' would still be for courts to intervene. 'In fact, it might actually work to our benefit, you know, to play like this. Okay, we'll play this game too, and we all go to court.' Then, Kelly said, 'we all lose.' The process of redistricting could prove to be an uphill battle for Democrats, who have less of an opportunity to gerrymander nationwide than their peers across the aisle because of the varied rules of each state. It's the responsibility of partisan legislatures in many Republican-led states to draw the boundaries of all electoral districts. Many more Democratic states use independent citizen-redistricting commissions -- a practice used to maintain fairness and combat gerrymandering. 'I do worry,' Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said during the press conference in Madison, about the outcome for Democrats if they decide to get in the redistricting fight. But, Kelly jumped in, 'there's a bigger risk in doing nothing.' 'You know, we can't just let this happen and act like it's fine and hope that the courts fix it. We have no idea, quite honestly, at this point, what the courts might do, but by virtue of us responding in kind, we do send a message,' Kelly added. 'We will put up a fight.' Evers, who campaigned for governor twice on ending gerrymandering in Wisconsin -- culminating with their Supreme Court's decision to strike down the state's non-contiguous state legislative maps as unconstitutional -- said that Wisconsin would not be making any changes to their maps. Other states, though, who may be 'up against the wall' should make modifications, Evers said. 'We're not changing our maps. Here in the state of Wisconsin, we worked hard to get fair maps, and we're going to continue to do so … in my heart of hearts, this is where we have to be. But when ... you have a gun against your head, you got to do something,' Evers said. Govs. Kelly, Walz, and a number of other Democratic governors also said they'd steer clear of redrawing their maps this cycle, either because they lead predominantly Republican states or because their redistricting processes wouldn't allow for a swift process to combat current GOP efforts. The idea of retaliating against Republicans on the matter of redistricting is a notable shift in strategy for Democrats, who have long touted their reverence for 'playing by the rules' on constitutional issues. For years, Democrats have championed independent redistricting, rules and others meant to encourage fairer maps are now holding them back in some areas and making it more challenging for them in certain districts. 'Democrats are expected to have the decorum. We're expected to protect the institution. We're expected to follow the rules on this,' Walz said, saying time for the party to go aggressively on offense to combat the Trump administration. 'We're not playing with a normal administration. We're playing one that is throwing all the rules out of there, and if the courts that he has packed aren't going to do that, then I think it is incumbent upon states that have the capacity or the ability to make sure that we are responding in kind," said Walz. "It is a terrible spot we're in as a country, but not responding is going to make it even worse."
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump eats his own: President appears to relish flaying Republican senators in the public square amid Epstein pressure
'You always hurt the one you love.' A Brooklyn-born songwriter named Allan Roberts wrote those lyrics and (with music by Doris Fisher) the Mills Brothers were the first of a litany of performers who turned it into an American standard. Lately, it seems to be a Donald Trump standard as well. Take, for instance, the case of Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri. Few Republicans have been bigger allies to Trump — on Jan. 6, 2021, the Yale Law graduate-turned-populist warrior famously pumped his fist to Trump supporters as he objected to the election results. When the Capitol cleared out after the riot, Hawley continued his objection. But this week, Hawley learned a bitter truth: no matter how MAGA someone is, Trump demands absolute loyalty — and even a perceived slight can leave you on the outside looking in. Hawley's crime? Trying to pass a bill he sponsored that would ban lawmakers from trading stocks. It seemed like a great way to 'Own the Libs,' since Hawley named it the PELOSI Act, a riff off of the former House Speaker Nanacy Pelosi's stock trading outperforming the market. But he faced significant opposition in committee — and every other Republican opposed it. It only passed thanks to support from Democrats. Sure as shooting, Trump lashed out at Hawley on Truth Social, criticizing him for not supporting an effort to launch an official investigation of Pelosi's stock trading. Trump ended his rant by calling Hawley a 'second-tier' senator. When The Independent caught up with Hawley, he laughed it off and said that he and Trump had a 'nice visit.' He later told Business Insider that he walked Trump through the bill and that, contrary to what some of Hawley's enemies in the GOP had said, it would not force the president to sell Mar-a-Lago. Trump said, 'You're exonerated,' according to Hawley. On the surface, the whole affair is a bit of a laugh and shows how fickle Trump can be. But it also shows that as Trump faces increased scrutiny for his handling of the Israel-Gaza war, an inability to bring an end to the war in Ukraine despite promising he'd handle Vladimir Putin, a labor and stock market battered by his tariff news, and – perhaps most gratingly – the fallout from his and his White House's mismanagement of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, the pressure is getting to him. And, six months into an administration that has control of both houses of Congress as well as a friendly majority on the Supreme Court, blaming Democrats simply won't serve as a release. Hawley is not the only Republican Trump has aimed his fire at. On Thursday evening, his ire turned to Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). 'Republicans, when in doubt, vote the exact opposite of Senator Susan Collins. Generally speaking, you can't go wrong,' Trump posted. Of course, Trump being angry at Collins is not entirely implausible under the best of conditions. Despite liberals being angry about Collins constantly saying she's 'concerned' with the latest Trump shenanigan and then voting his way anyway, she did vote to convict him after January 6, endorsed Nikki Haley against Trump in 2024 and, most recently, voted against Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill.' But as a senator from Maine, Collins is probably the only Republican who could win in New England. As The Independent wrote last month, that popularity has created a chilling effect where many promising young Democrats don't want to challenge her. And that makes her a kind of safe target for Trump rage. If anything, it's a surprise that Trump didn't turn his fire on her earlier. (Still, Trump's salvos could make life more difficult because of the fact she leads the Senate Appropriations Committee, which means she controls the federal budget.) Of course, Trump has already tamed Collins' partner in moderation, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). Murkowski famously agonized over the vote for the One Big, Beautiful Bill before deciding to support it in the hopes the House would change it. Which it didn't. Later, the Trump administration went behind her back and issued executive orders to curb renewable energy projects she wanted to preserve. She told The Anchorage Daily News she felt 'cheated.' But when The Independent asked her whether that made it harder to work with Trump, Murkowski said 'no.' Pressed why that is, she said 'because we have an understanding.' 'Just generally,' she said. 'He knows that I'm going to advocate for my interests. I know that he's going to advocate for his.' The only Republican senator who has seemed to learn there is no way to win with Trump is Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). Tillis came out in opposition to Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' in June, which caused Trump to attack him. This came despite the fact Tillis had voted for most of Trump's nominees and had consistently defended him. Shortly after, Tillis announced his decision not to seek re-election. 'I respect President Trump, I support the majority of his agenda, but I don't bow to anybody when the people of North Carolina are at risk and this bill puts them at risk,' Tillis told The Independent at the time. Now, Democrats have their dream candidate vying for his seat as former governor Roy Cooper, who won statewide the same year Trump won North Carolina in 2016 and again in 2020, announced his candidacy. Cooper is expected to raise gobs of money and have a decent advantage in the polls. Trump's decision to attack strategic allies shows that his increasing unpopularity has caused him to be more insular. And while it's unclear if Hawley's trading bill will become law, many Republican senators might cash out their stock in Trump.
