@RedTagAlan
One for our US friends really.
--
I ain't a lawyer, but I am sure Trump and his MAGA pals are wrong about the WH ballroom. It is Federal property ( or will be), so the Hatch act will apply. And that says federal property and staff can't be used for partisan politics. And given that the WH correspondents are not part of Government, would they even be able to use Fed property for what is a private political function?
I am thinking "look ahead" here. What would the repubs say if the next Dem POTUS used the ballroom for such a private function ?
As a retired Fed I'm pretty familiar with the Hatch Act on a 'lower level' basis of course.
First, Hatch doesn't apply to POTUS or VP.
Hatch says that government facilities of any kind cannot be used for political purposes. And that federal employees cannot 'appear in or use their official capacity for partisan purposes'.
What the former means is pretty clear. We cannot use any government facility or equipment for partisan politics. No Xeroxing, not even a pen or a staple to be used.
What that last means is that if I appeared at or spoke at a partisan campaign rally and said "I work for XX agency and this candidate is the best one" or I wore my ID badge during a rally I would be in violation of Hatch. BUT, I could speak or endorse a candidate in a 'private' capacity wearing 'plain clothes'. We were also barred from discussing politics, disseminating partisan materials, and wearing political badges in the office during business hours.
I haven't seen the original comments re the ballroom, but I'm assuming that they're asserting that since the ballroom is (supposedly) paid for by 'private contributions' that Hatch doesn't apply. If that's their assertion it'll end up in court. Many federal facilities are housed in private buildings. Those facilities are subject to Hatch. So why shouldn't the reverse be true? That a so called 'private' facility lodged on govt property is subject to Hatch? Many of our National Parks have private businesses and foundation stores in them and they aren't allowed to hang posters or put flyers on the counter. So there is precedent for this.
Scrotus keeps saying that it's a 'gift to the Nation', which to me means that it will be a 'government facility' and therefore subject to Hatch. If so, it cannot be legally used for partisan occasions. And cannot be used definitely for 'campaign activities'. He's not going to be able to have it both ways. That it's 'public' when he wants to look good and it's 'private' when he wants to use it. And so, SCOTUS here we come!
Oh and PS; The WHCD isn't a partisan function. It's put on by the White House Correspondents Association. As far as WHCA using the ballroom, I would think that wouldn't be likely. The WHCA would be smart enough to know that 'conditions' would probably be put on their usage. Also, since you can't 'rent' the State Rooms in the WH for private functions, I'd assume the ballroom would be the same. Of course, Scrotus will want to wring any penny he can get for the use of 'his' ballroom, so who knows.