The Donald Trump campaign made a pretty big election move this week: it filed a Federal Election Commission complaint against the UK’s Labour Party over what it views as blatant foreign interference in the U.S. election specifically intended to help the Harris-Walz campaign. This step most clearly reflects many of the divisive and contentious connections that arise between foreign political organisations and the electoral processes of the United States.

Charges of Impropriety Expenditures

The FEC complaint cites extensive media accounts of communications between the Labour Party and the Harris campaign, noting those communications likely would be considered illicit “contributions.” The complaint reports: “There is evidence that members of the Labour Party have travelled to the U.S. to campaign for Harris. This would raise the question of whether foreign nationals are prohibited from engaging in such activities.

Politico and the Washington Post report that Harris’s campaign communicated with the Labour Party, which allegedly secretly met with senior officials. The complaint also invokes a now-deleted social media post by Sofia Patel, head of operations for the Labour Party, in which she wrote that “nearly 100” party members would be visiting battleground states in the U.S. This blog post suggested that arrangements for accommodation would be made for those participating, thus casting further doubt over the voluntariness of such schemes.

Labour Party Response

Labour has said nothing official on the subject so far. However, party insiders flatly clarified that Labour activists campaigning in the US are doing it as private citizens, and their travels were not organised or financed by the party. Under FEC rules, that makes a difference, as they’d permit foreigners to volunteer in US campaigns if they’re unpaid.

Historical Background and Comparison

The scandal has a precedent in a similar case in 2016 when the ALP forwarded delegates to aid Bernie Sanders’ campaign. In that case, the party and campaign both received civil penalties of $14,500 for inappropriate foreign involvement. It makes one wonder how international political activity is restricted and what awaits America’s electoral integrity in such cases.

Normalising International Political Contact

It is essential to realise that the communication between party officials from the UK and their counterplayers in the United States is not extraterritorial. Over a long period, different political parties, such as the Conservative Party from the UK and the Republicans from the United States, have had such communications.

This tradition may, therefore, make it even more challenging to understand the implications of the Labour Party’s actions in the case.

For more reporting like this, please follow Newsdecensored on your favorite social media sites and bookmark the website. Thank you for your interest and support.