Defending the Integrity
of Our Institutions
A pro-growth agenda requires durable institutions, which today are under sustained assault. As our collective numbness grows, public attention may fade, enabling standards to reset. This ledger preserves a factual record in order to counter the inevitability of this outcome.
Institutions erode gradually when violations of norms become routine and public attention fades. Desensitization, not disagreement, poses the greatest long-term threat to institutional stability.
OFA’s contribution is not extended commentary or moral argument. It is preservation of record. The material that follows is a cumulative, factual list of documented institutional breaches and norm violations. Its purpose is to counter collective amnesia, provide historical clarity, and make visible the scale and persistence of conduct that threatens the institutional foundations on which growth and opportunity depend.
Institutional Integrity Ledger
After ABC and NBC declined to interrupt regular programming to air his election integrity address, Trump publicly demanded their broadcast licenses be revoked, claiming without evidence that their editorial decision proved complicity in election fraud. The FCC, which holds authority over broadcast licenses, is led by a Trump appointee. No president has previously called for license revocation in direct response to a network's editorial programming decisions.
Trump delivered a prime-time White House address claiming U.S. election systems were vulnerable to fraud, declassifying documents he said supported the claim. FactCheck.org and election experts across party lines found the released documents contained no new evidence of fraud and that an FBI review closed its own investigation without finding a criminal violation. ABC and NBC declined to carry the address; Trump publicly called for their broadcast licenses to be revoked, stating they were complicit in election fraud.
A federal judge voided the May 2026 settlement granting Trump, his family, and his businesses permanent immunity from IRS audit and prosecution, ruling it had no basis in law and represented a bad faith attempt to manipulate the judicial process. The judge ordered sanctions and referred the president's attorneys for possible disciplinary action.
Federal agents appeared at the homes of four New York Times reporters on a Friday night to deliver grand jury subpoenas demanding testimony about their reporting on security concerns surrounding the Qatari-gifted Air Force One. FBI Director Kash Patel met with White House officials and spoke with Trump by phone the same day the subpoenas were issued. The administration stated the reporters were not the targets - the sources were - but press freedom organizations noted that compelling journalists to identify confidential sources produces the same chilling effect as targeting them directly.
Trump appointed Bill Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as acting Director of National Intelligence. He has no intelligence background of any kind. The position was created by Congress after September 11 to coordinate 18 federal agencies and, by statute, requires “extensive national security expertise.”
The Justice Department opened a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, who won two civil judgments against Trump totaling $88 million after a jury found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation. The investigation centers on whether Carroll committed perjury in a 2022 deposition when she said no one was paying her legal fees, though billionaire Reid Hoffman later covered some costs.
The Justice Department agreed to permanently bar the IRS from examining or prosecuting Trump, his sons, affiliated individuals, and Trump Organization businesses for any tax matters arising before the settlement date.
The Justice Department announced a $1.776 billion fund to compensate individuals who claim they were subjected to politically motivated investigations or prosecutions by prior administrations.
The Senate declined to require authorization for military action, reflecting continued congressional inaction on constitutional war powers responsibilities.
A federal judge documented numerous violations of court orders, warning of potential contempt and raising concerns about compliance with judicial authority.
Investigations found additional records withheld despite statutory requirements, raising concerns about completeness of disclosure and executive compliance.
A federal judge held a prosecutor in contempt for failing to comply with court orders, highlighting conflict between executive actions and judicial authority.
Federal prosecutors sought charges against lawmakers for public statements; the grand jury declined, raising concerns about use of criminal process.
The Justice Department tracked legislators’ access to disclosed materials, raising concerns about executive monitoring of congressional oversight activities.
The Justice Department released millions of pages while withholding additional records, raising concerns about compliance with statutory disclosure requirements.
Federal agents fatally shot a civilian and restricted state investigators’ access to evidence, raising concerns about accountability and intergovernmental legal process.
U.S. forces captured a foreign leader without congressional authorization, raising concerns about executive war powers and constitutional requirements.
State and local governments filed suit alleging constitutional violations in federal enforcement actions, highlighting conflict between federal authority and state protections.
Officials reported arrest figures that could not be independently verified, while declining to release supporting data, raising concerns about transparency and accuracy.
Federal agents conducted enforcement operations involving warrantless arrests and detentions, prompting legal challenges over constitutional protections and federal authority.
After a prosecutor declined charges, an interim U.S. attorney pursued indictments later dismissed, raising concerns about political influence over prosecutions.
Justice Department filings advanced broad interpretations of presidential immunity, testing limits of executive authority in ongoing legal proceedings.
A federal grand jury indicted John Bolton on charges involving classified information, raising questions about application of national security statutes.
The administration publicly criticized and signaled review of a Federal Reserve governor, raising concerns about pressure on central bank independence.
Administration officials labeled certain protest participants as terrorists, escalating rhetoric and raising concerns about treatment of domestic dissent.
The administration publicly commented on an ongoing homicide investigation, raising concerns about executive influence over active law enforcement proceedings.
The administration authorized National Guard deployment in response to protests, raising concerns about federal authority and balance between state and federal control.
The administration supported proposals restricting judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions, potentially limiting judicial checks on executive actions.
The administration supported federal review of officials involved in election certification disputes, raising concerns about federal involvement in state election administration.
Several U.S. Attorneys were replaced, including in districts handling matters involving the president or associates, raising concerns about prosecutorial independence.
This ledger is updated regularly as new institutional developments are documented and verified.
DOJ Subpoenas New York Times Reporters Over Air Force One Coverage
Federal agents appeared at the homes of four New York Times reporters on a Friday night to deliver grand jury subpoenas demanding testimony about their reporting on security concerns surrounding the Qatari-gifted Air Force One. FBI Director Kash Patel met with White House officials and spoke with Trump by phone the same day the subpoenas were issued. The administration stated the reporters were not the targets - the sources were - but press freedom organizations noted that compelling journalists to identify confidential sources produces the same chilling effect as targeting them directly.