Skip to content Skip to footer

Lawmakers Question Legality of Trump Accepting GOP Nomination From White House

While Trump is not subject to the Hatch Act, his staff is, inevitably setting them up for possibly breaking the law.

President Trump greets children on the south lawn of the White House, April 25, 2019, in Washington, D.C.

Former Vice President Joe Biden announced on Wednesday that he would not be going to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, later this month to deliver his acceptance speech for the Democratic Party’s nomination for president. Before the coronavirus pandemic reached the United States earlier this year, it was assumed that the Democratic nominee would accept the nomination in person as was customary.

Instead, Biden will be delivering his acceptance speech from his home state of Delaware, and likely not in the presence of a crowd given the concerns around the rise in COVID-19 infections in the U.S. Other speakers slated to speak at the Democratic National Convention will also not be making the trip to Milwaukee.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump, who has had his own set of troubles nailing down a place to accept the nomination for president on the Republican ticket, made a controversial statement Wednesday morning on “Fox & Friends” that he may just use the White House itself to give his acceptance speech.

“It’s easy and I think it’s a beautiful setting,” Trump explained. “And we are thinking about that. It’s certainly one of the alternatives. It’s the easiest alternative. I think it’s a beautiful alternative.”

The idea of using the White House, a government-funded place of official business for the chief executive, for a political purpose would be highly controversial, if not illegal. Under the Hatch Act, no federal employee may use government resources to promote political causes or purposes.

While Trump isn’t technically subject to the Hatch Act, others at the White House who work under him are, and could be found in violation of it if they’re seen assisting him in any way with the speech.

Although in the same interview Trump also said he could “go someplace else” if people had qualms about him using the executive residence for his political speech, it nevertheless set off a number of criticisms from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle shortly after he made the suggestion. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-California), for example, said “it’s very wrong” for Trump to use the White House in such a way.

“For the President of the United States to degrade once again the White House as he has done over and over again by saying he’s going to completely politicize it, is something that should be rejected right out of hand,” Pelosi explained.

A number of Republicans in Congress were also averse to using the White House for Trump’s campaign speech, including John Thune, a high-ranking Republican senator from South Dakota.

“Is that even legal?” Thune asked out loud when confronted with the question.

“I assume that’s not something that you could do,” he added. “I assume there’s some Hatch Act issues or something … I think anything to do with federal property would seem to me to be problematic.”

Richard Painter, who served as White House ethics lawyer for former President George W. Bush, agreed that Trump would be making things incredibly difficult for those who are subject to the law on the matter.

“He may not be violating the Hatch Act, but he is ordering other people to. At a certain point you are using White House resources, and that is a violation of the Hatch Act,” Painter said.

Kedric Payne, the senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, agreed.

“Government employees cannot wear or display campaign material at the White House,” Payne told The Washington Post. “The RNC would have a difficult time arguing that they can reimburse for the expenses, because how do you calculate such things as the fair market value of the White House lawn?”

The time to figure out a venue to accept the nomination is winding down, but there are still a few weeks left to make a decision. Trump is scheduled to accept his party’s nomination on August 27. Biden will accept the Democratic Party’s nomination just one week earlier, on August 20.

Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn

Dear Truthout Community,

If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.

We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.

Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.

There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.

After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?

It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.

We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.

We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.

Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.

We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.

With love, rage, and solidarity,

Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy