Texas Republican Rep. Ronny Jackson has been fundraising with what appears to be an unauthorized legal expense fund.
Under House rules, members of Congress must get approval from the Ethics Committee to open a legal expense trust fund — and make that approval public — before soliciting any donations for the fund.
But despite there being no public record of Jackson receiving permission to open such an account — and no public record of any of the required quarterly fundraising reports — his campaign has been referencing the trust in fundraising communications for months.
One fundraising blast titled “WAR DECLARED ON PETE HEGSETH,” called on readers to “DONATE $20.24 TO STAND WITH PETE.” In the fine print, the fundraising call states it was paid for by various committees, including “Ronny Jackson Legal Expense Trust.” A web archive of his campaign website references the expense fund dating back to last spring.
Under House ethics rules, members of Congress can only open legal expense funds for a narrow set of reasons, including criminal charges or cases related to their official duties, and only when “the Committee has given written permission.” There is no public record of Jackson ever receiving written permission for a legal fund, much less for use on ads.
Jackson was under a House ethics investigation into separate allegations of misuse of campaign funds last year. That investigation was announced around the same time his campaign started listing his legal expense fund on his website, according to online archives, though there is no record of the Ethics Committee ever granting permission for him to open such a fund. The Ethics Committee declined to comment.
A House ethics panel closed its investigation into Jackson and three other lawmakers in December stating, “In several of the matters that the Committee is resolving, there was evidence that the Member’s campaign did not fully comply with the applicable standards relating to personal use of campaign funds, as well as reporting or recordkeeping requirements for campaign expenditures. However, there was no evidence that any Member intentionally misused campaign funds for their personal benefit.”
Members under investigation commonly request permission from the Ethics Committee to open a legal expense fund — there are public records for 28 lawmakers’ legal funds over the past two decades at the House’s Legislative Resource Center. What is uncommon is operating a legal fund with no public disclosures and for such a long time.
Jackson’s legal expense fund also raises questions around his involvement in Donald Trump’s lawsuit against CBS over their editing of Kamala Harris’ campaign interview. CBS lawyers said the lawmaker joining the suit was “naked forum-shopping” in order to keep the case before a friendly judge in Texas. But campaign finance experts say it also raises questions around how he’s paying his attorneys.
“If he had asked to create one for the purpose of participating in this private lawsuit for which he’s asking for $10 billion? They would have said, ‘Uh no you can’t have a legal defense fund for this purpose,” one longtime campaign finance attorney who was not authorized by their law firm to speak on the matter told NOTUS. “Which then raises the other question of who is paying the lawyers representing him in this lawsuit? Because he can’t accept the gift of free legal services either.”
Jackson is likely barred from accepting pro bono representation for the CBS case since House ethics rules only allow members to accept pro bono representation for cases related to federal laws, regulations or actions.
He could pay for his legal representation in the CBS case through personal funds or a leadership PAC, the campaign finance expert told NOTUS, but Jackson has not publicly said how he’s paying lawyers or why he has a legal defense fund.
Jackson’s office did not reply to NOTUS’ request for comment via multiple emails, phone calls or an in-person visit on the legal expense fund nor on how he was funding his legal expenses related to the CBS case. Ed Paltzik, an attorney representing both Trump and Jackson in the CBS case, simply responded to NOTUS’ list of questions with the statement, “President Trump is committed to holding those who traffic in fake news, hoaxes, and lies to account. CBS and Paramount committed the worst kind of election interference and fraud in the closing days of the most important presidential election in history. President Trump will pursue this vital matter to its just and rightful conclusion.”
Jackson told NOTUS in mid-March he joined the CBS lawsuit because “It was election interference the way the whole thing was run, it just has to be called out. You can’t keep doing that,” he said. “They purposely chopped this interview up that they did with Kamala Harris to make it look like something it was not. We’re just calling them out on that. It shouldn’t happen, regardless of who it’s happening to.”
—
Claire Heddles is a NOTUS reporter and Allbritton Journalism Institute fellow.
John T. Seward, a NOTUS reporter and Allbritton Journalism Institute fellow, contributed to this report.