6 ms·

Out of curiosity, are there any laws on the books right now which are meant to prevent this sort of thing? For example, let's assume a foreign government decid

Out of curiosity, are there any laws on the books right now which are meant to prevent this sort of thing? For example, let's assume a foreign government decided to purchase ads either backing or attacking a US political candidate, and they were completely overt about it. (No hiding behind shell companies or transferring funds anonymously; completely out in the open.) Are there any laws or systems currently in place which would stop them from doing that?

vkou 9y ago
And, as a related question - should there be? What about a foreign corporation? A foreign corporation with a domestic presence? A domestic corporation? None of these groups are beholden to the public interest.
- pamqzl 9y ago
  Or just a foreign individual? I'm a foreign individual who went around making comments on the US election... what's the difference between me doing it privately and a company doing it?
  - LeifCarrotson 9y ago
    As much as America would like to think their laws apply across the globe, they don't actually have jurisdiction over you. There's nothing they can do to prevent you from talking about the campaign. They do have jurisdiction over the candidate and campaign you endorse, though. If you contacted your candidate and offered them money or services in the hope that they could use your help to get elected, and they accepted your offer they would be guilty. You wouldn't be. Unfortunately, it seems like a fairly impotent law if all you have to do as a foreign national with an interest in the election is to support a candidate without their endorsement.
    - pamqzl 9y ago
      But I could, for instance, buy advertisements in support of my favoured candidate? I guess not on US TV or US billboards since they're under the control of the US. But if I buy ads on the internet that just happen to be seen by US citizens there's nothing the US can do about it, right?
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > As much as America would like to think their laws apply across the globe, they don't actually have jurisdiction over you. You might want to check with Humberto Álvarez-Machaín (acquitted, sure, but not because the law didn't apply to him) or Manuel Noriega about that.
      - tim333 9y ago
        Or Howard Marks in the book Mr Nice tells a bit about his thinking the US had no power over him and then, oops.
AaronFriel 9y ago
There are laws against foreign nationals to provide a "thing of value" to a US political campaign. This is obviously a difficult thing to tease out. My source on this is Eugene Volokh, a law professor and First Amendment attorney: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/07/12/can-it-be-a-crime-to-do-opposition-research-by-asking-foreigners-for-information/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... The fundamental question then is: was this intentional on behalf of the foreign agent to provide a "thing of value" to a US political campaign, and/or did a political candidate or campaign solicit this?
- Ajedi32 9y ago
  But in this hypothetical scenario they're not donating to a political campaign, they're buying advertising space directly from a private organization. I suppose you could argue that ads which advocate for a political candidate could count as a "thing of value" for that candidate, but even in that case, there _is_ no foreign national to punish here; the entity that funded the effort is a foreign government, not an individual person.
  - AaronFriel 9y ago
    One doesn't have to donate to a political campaign to contribute a "thing of value" to a campaign, that argument is elaborated on in the link I shared. The law does not define thing of value to be a donation or monetary contribution to a campaign, but something much broader, see 52 U.S.C. § 30121. Likewise, foreign national is a legal term that includes foreign principals, which includes governments, see 22 U.S.C. § 611.
sigmar 9y ago
My understanding is no, this is legal. But this would be illegal if a U.S. political campaign knew about and facilitated these ad buys, as then it would be a contribution. Source: https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml#Prohibition https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml#Pro...
JamesCoyne 9y ago
The Federal Election Commission would have something to say: "The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment." [0] The definition of "foreign national" is quite broad. How this works with regards to PAC contributions is unclear to me. [0] https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml
- LeifCarrotson 9y ago
  > Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment. Who are these "persons"? It can't logically be the foreign nationals who are attempting to help a campaign. They're not under the jurisdiction of US federal law. It also can't logically be the candidates. Otherwise, the obvious tactic would be to provide overt, unrequested aid to the opposition candidate(s) and send them all to jail. I'm not sure it can be Facebook or other Internet sides. It is true that Facebook is a US company, but the content on their sites is protected under the DMCA safe harbor exemption. And then the law wouldn't handle the case of sites not under US ownership. FECA dates back to the 70s, and it doesn't seem to do a good job of handling the globalization of the Internet. If someone from overseas looked at the facts themselves and, without talking to a candidate, just plastered Google and Facebook and YouTube and Twitter with endorsement of one candidate and criticism of another, is it reasonable to try to stop them?
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > It can't logically be the foreign nationals who are attempting to help a campaign. They're not under the jurisdiction of US federal law. Criminal violations of US laws whose prohibition is not expressly territorially restricted that occur outside of the US are successfully prosecuted in US courts with some frequency. Bringing people before the court for prosecution may be challenging where extradition isn't an option, but outright kidnapping from a foreign country or even full-scale military military invasion to do so have occurred.
elipsey 9y ago
TFA: "Under federal law and Federal Election Commission regulations, both foreign nationals and foreign governments are prohibited from making contributions or spending money to influence a federal, state or local election in the United States. The ban includes independent expenditures made in connection with an election. Those banned from such spending include foreign citizens, foreign governments, foreign political parties, foreign corporations, foreign associations and foreign partnerships, according to the FEC."
- Ajedi32 9y ago
  > foreign governments, foreign political parties How is that enforced? A US court can't exactly send the Russian government or the Communist Party of China to prison for breaking the law here, can it?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
makomk 9y ago
Well, it's important to bear in mind that most of these ads supposedly didn't back or attack a particular candidate, and that banning foreign funding of political and social activism of this kind would be a very Russian thing to do. Claiming they're foreign agents is one of the Russian government's favourite tactics for raiding and shutting down inconvenient political NGOs and activists. Frankly, I wouldn't entirely put it past them to fund these ads partly to bait out something they could use to justify their own domestic crackdowns and spin US criticism as hypocrasy.

vkou 9y ago

And, as a related question - should there be? What about a foreign corporation? A foreign corporation with a domestic presence? A domestic corporation? None of these groups are beholden to the public interest.

pamqzl 9y ago
Or just a foreign individual? I'm a foreign individual who went around making comments on the US election... what's the difference between me doing it privately and a company doing it?
- LeifCarrotson 9y ago
  As much as America would like to think their laws apply across the globe, they don't actually have jurisdiction over you. There's nothing they can do to prevent you from talking about the campaign. They do have jurisdiction over the candidate and campaign you endorse, though. If you contacted your candidate and offered them money or services in the hope that they could use your help to get elected, and they accepted your offer they would be guilty. You wouldn't be. Unfortunately, it seems like a fairly impotent law if all you have to do as a foreign national with an interest in the election is to support a candidate without their endorsement.
  - pamqzl 9y ago
    But I could, for instance, buy advertisements in support of my favoured candidate? I guess not on US TV or US billboards since they're under the control of the US. But if I buy ads on the internet that just happen to be seen by US citizens there's nothing the US can do about it, right?
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > As much as America would like to think their laws apply across the globe, they don't actually have jurisdiction over you. You might want to check with Humberto Álvarez-Machaín (acquitted, sure, but not because the law didn't apply to him) or Manuel Noriega about that.
    - tim333 9y ago
      Or Howard Marks in the book Mr Nice tells a bit about his thinking the US had no power over him and then, oops.

AaronFriel 9y ago

There are laws against foreign nationals to provide a "thing of value" to a US political campaign. This is obviously a difficult thing to tease out. My source on this is Eugene Volokh, a law professor and First Amendment attorney: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/07/12/can-it-be-a-crime-to-do-opposition-research-by-asking-foreigners-for-information/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... The fundamental question then is: was this intentional on behalf of the foreign agent to provide a "thing of value" to a US political campaign, and/or did a political candidate or campaign solicit this?

Ajedi32 9y ago
But in this hypothetical scenario they're not donating to a political campaign, they're buying advertising space directly from a private organization. I suppose you could argue that ads which advocate for a political candidate could count as a "thing of value" for that candidate, but even in that case, there _is_ no foreign national to punish here; the entity that funded the effort is a foreign government, not an individual person.
- AaronFriel 9y ago
  One doesn't have to donate to a political campaign to contribute a "thing of value" to a campaign, that argument is elaborated on in the link I shared. The law does not define thing of value to be a donation or monetary contribution to a campaign, but something much broader, see 52 U.S.C. § 30121. Likewise, foreign national is a legal term that includes foreign principals, which includes governments, see 22 U.S.C. § 611.

sigmar 9y ago

My understanding is no, this is legal. But this would be illegal if a U.S. political campaign knew about and facilitated these ad buys, as then it would be a contribution. Source: https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml#Prohibition https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml#Pro...

JamesCoyne 9y ago

The Federal Election Commission would have something to say: "The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment." [0] The definition of "foreign national" is quite broad. How this works with regards to PAC contributions is unclear to me. [0] https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml

LeifCarrotson 9y ago
> Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment. Who are these "persons"? It can't logically be the foreign nationals who are attempting to help a campaign. They're not under the jurisdiction of US federal law. It also can't logically be the candidates. Otherwise, the obvious tactic would be to provide overt, unrequested aid to the opposition candidate(s) and send them all to jail. I'm not sure it can be Facebook or other Internet sides. It is true that Facebook is a US company, but the content on their sites is protected under the DMCA safe harbor exemption. And then the law wouldn't handle the case of sites not under US ownership. FECA dates back to the 70s, and it doesn't seem to do a good job of handling the globalization of the Internet. If someone from overseas looked at the facts themselves and, without talking to a candidate, just plastered Google and Facebook and YouTube and Twitter with endorsement of one candidate and criticism of another, is it reasonable to try to stop them?
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > It can't logically be the foreign nationals who are attempting to help a campaign. They're not under the jurisdiction of US federal law. Criminal violations of US laws whose prohibition is not expressly territorially restricted that occur outside of the US are successfully prosecuted in US courts with some frequency. Bringing people before the court for prosecution may be challenging where extradition isn't an option, but outright kidnapping from a foreign country or even full-scale military military invasion to do so have occurred.

elipsey 9y ago

TFA: "Under federal law and Federal Election Commission regulations, both foreign nationals and foreign governments are prohibited from making contributions or spending money to influence a federal, state or local election in the United States. The ban includes independent expenditures made in connection with an election. Those banned from such spending include foreign citizens, foreign governments, foreign political parties, foreign corporations, foreign associations and foreign partnerships, according to the FEC."

Ajedi32 9y ago
> foreign governments, foreign political parties How is that enforced? A US court can't exactly send the Russian government or the Communist Party of China to prison for breaking the law here, can it?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

makomk 9y ago

Well, it's important to bear in mind that most of these ads supposedly didn't back or attack a particular candidate, and that banning foreign funding of political and social activism of this kind would be a very Russian thing to do. Claiming they're foreign agents is one of the Russian government's favourite tactics for raiding and shutting down inconvenient political NGOs and activists. Frankly, I wouldn't entirely put it past them to fund these ads partly to bait out something they could use to justify their own domestic crackdowns and spin US criticism as hypocrasy.