A group of Democratic senators wrote a scathing letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem on Wednesday over a roughly 30-second video, which she requested be played across U.S. airports last week, that blamed the ongoing government shutdown, which has left many Transportation Security Administration agents and air flight controllers working without pay, on Democrats.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]“It is TSA’s top priority to make sure you have the most pleasant and efficient airport experience as possible while we keep you safe,” Noem says in the video. “However, Democrats in Congress refuse to fund the government. And because of this, many of our operations are impacted and most of our TSA employees are working without pay. We will continue to do all that we can to avoid delays that will impact your travel. And our hope is that Democrats will soon recognize the importance of opening the government.”
President Donald Trump’s Administration and Republican Party leaders have blamed Democrats for the shutdown, which began on Oct. 1. The shutdown has disrupted normal government operations as many federal employees have been furloughed, or put on unpaid leave, while others deemed essential, like TSA agents and air traffic controllers, must work without pay, leading some to call out sick instead.
But major airports refused to display Noem’s video because of its explicitly partisan political messaging, which may actually run afoul of the law.
Seventeen Democratic U.S. senators demanded that Noem “immediately remove the videos,” arguing that “federal law clearly prohibits using federal funding for partisan political activities” and that requiring airports to play her video is “likely” a violation of a federal law called the Hatch Act. “We will be monitoring your compliance with federal law,” the senators warned.
Some legal experts concur. Stanley Brand, professor at Penn State Dickinson Law, told NPR that Noem’s video “seems like a blatant use of political messaging in a forum and by somebody who probably shouldn’t be doing it.” And John Berry, a lawyer who has handled Hatch Act cases, told CNN that Noem in her official capacity is covered by the Act, especially if she filmed the video “using government resources.”
In the letter, the senators also asked Noem to provide a breakdown of the cost of producing and disseminating the video and to disclose who was consulted on the decision to create it.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, one of the signatories, said in a video posted on X that it was “illegal” for Noem “to use those TSA monitors to spread her personal political propaganda.” In a separate post, he also lauded a number of Connecticut airports that have refused to display it; however, some airports across the country have still chosen to show the clip.
Noem’s video is just one of many instances in which government officials and agencies may have potentially violated the Hatch Act during the shutdown. Non-profit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen filed several complaints over how numerous government websites, including that of the White House, explicitly name Democrats as responsible for the shutdown. Anti-Democrat messaging also appeared on auto-generated email responses from federal employees and agency newsletters.
Here’s what to know.
Which airports have refused to play the video?
Some U.S. airports have reportedly shown Noem’s video. The Detroit Free Press reported that Detroit Metropolitan Airport and Sawyer Regional Airport in Michigan have shown the video, with a spokesperson for Detroit Metro saying that “the TSA operates its own display monitors in the passenger screening checkpoints.”
Bismarck Airport in North Dakota is also displaying the video, CNN reported, and the TSA is displaying the video at Texas’ El Paso International Airport security checkpoint, according to the Texas Tribune.
But several major airports rejected Noem’s request. Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, in a statement to Fox 5 Atlanta, said that the airport decided not to show Noem’s video as it “strives to maintain a neutral and welcoming environment for all travelers.”
Chicago’s O’Hare International and Midway International Airports also aren’t showing the video. The Chicago Department of Aviation confirmed it declined DHS’s request, saying that “advertising at Chicago’s airports, including promotional materials and public service announcements, must comply with CDA’s Advertising Guidelines, which prohibit content that endorses or opposes any named political party.” The city’s Democratic mayor, Brandon Johnson, said in a statement, that he ordered the CDA not to play the video. “Our airports are for Chicagoans and visitors to travel safely to and from our city; they are not for the Trump Administration to spread propaganda using taxpayer resources,” Brandon said in a statement obtained by CBS.
Some Texas airports, such as Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, Dallas Love Field Airport, Corpus Christi International Airport, and San Antonio International Airport, are also not showing the video. Spokespersons for Dallas Fort Worth and Dallas Love Field told the Texas Tribune that their policies prohibit political content from being broadcast, while the other two airports did not provide explanations.
Denver International Airport was also among the airports that did not show the video, according to CBS News.
Airports in the San Francisco Bay Area, including San Francisco International Airport, have declined displaying Noem’s video too. And NBC Los Angeles reported Tuesday that Los Angeles International Airport and Hollywood Burbank Airport are also not showing the video.
John F. Kennedy, LaGuardia, Westchester, and Newark airports in New York also turned down Noem, with the Port Authority saying that its “longstanding policies prevent airing of politically partisan messages at our facilities, so airports are not airing the video on airport-controlled screens.”
Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas will also not show Noem’s clip, with an airport spokesperson saying that it “did not align with the neutral, informational nature” of public service announcements typically shown. The Seattle Times reported that Seattle-Tacoma International Airport joined in the refusal, with a spokesperson for the Port of Seattle pointing to “the political nature of the content.”
Brand, the Penn State Dickinson Law professor, told NPR that, as recipients of federal money, airports may face prohibitions on how to use that funding and that refusing to play the video could insulate them from future legal issues. “They just don’t want to threaten their funding,” Brand said.
What is the Hatch Act?
Congress passed “An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities” in 1939, and it has come to be known after its then-sponsor, Democratic Sen. Carl Hatch of New Mexico. The law limits the political activities of federal civilian employees in the executive branch, as well as some state, D.C., and local government employees who work with federally funded programs.
Most federal employees covered by the Hatch Act are allowed to take an active part in political management or in political campaigns with some restrictions, such as on using one’s authority to influence an election, soliciting and accepting political contributions except in certain circumstances, and engaging in political activity while on duty or while wearing office insignias.
Other federal employees, particularly those in sensitive law enforcement and security posts, cannot take active part in campaigns or in political management. This includes employees from the Federal Election Commission or the Election Assistance Commission, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Council, and the National Security Agency, among others.
The Office of Special Counsel, an independent federal watchdog, probes and prosecutes alleged Hatch Act violations. The office says on its website that, “except for the President and Vice President, all federal civilian executive branch employees are covered by the Hatch Act, including employees of the U.S. Postal Service.” It adds that the Act even covers part-time employees and employees even when they are on annual leave, sick leave, leave without pay, or furlough. But it clarified that employees who work on an occasional or irregular basis or who are special government employees only face restrictions “when they are engaged in government business.”
If the OSC finds enough evidence of a Hatch Act violation, it can bring the case before the Merit Systems Protection Board, another independent agency, which assesses whether the OSC sufficiently proved those infractions, and if so, what penalties to impose. Those found to have violated the Hatch Act face a range of disciplinary actions, such as, according to OSC’s pamphlet for federal employees, “removal from federal service, reduction in grade, debarment from federal service for a period not to exceed 5 years, suspension, letter of reprimand, or a civil penalty not to exceed $1000.”
Exempted from this rule, however, are White House-commissioned officers and Senate-approved presidential appointees. If any of them commit a Hatch Act violation, the OSC may submit a report to the President, with a recommendation for disciplinary action. In this case, if found to have violated the Hatch Act, Noem would have to face sanctions from President Trump, who, like her, has blamed Democrats for the shutdown.
The Hatch Act has been violated many times in U.S. history, across presidencies. Trump’s first-term Administration hinted at how Hatch Act cases could be handled in his second term.
In 2019, the OSC reported that Kellyanne Conway, a former senior counselor to Trump, violated the Hatch Act and, in a rare move, recommended that he fire her. Trump did not do that—the White House instead rejected the OSC’s claims. And in 2020, the OSC reported to Trump that former assistant to the President and director of the Office for Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro violated the act for comments he made about then-presidential and vice-presidential candidates Joe Biden and Kamala Harris on his official X account and during official media appearances. Nothing came out of that OSC report either.
Hence then, the article about what is the hatch act which democrats accuse kristi noem of violating was published today ( ) and is available on Time ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( What Is the Hatch Act, Which Democrats Accuse Kristi Noem of Violating? )
Also on site :