California Campaign Cash, Legal Bills and Unanswered Questions

When a member of Congress opens a legal defense fund, it usually makes national news. Reporters dig into the donors, and ethics experts ask whether federal rules allow the lawmaker to spend donor money to fight specific types of legal battles.

Investigations into state legislators is hit or miss when it comes to media scrutiny. In California, where citizen journalists and federal probes have uncovered a series of high-profile fraud and corruption cases this year, Democratic state Sen. Susan Rubio’s defense fund has drawn virtually no public attention. The lack of scrutiny has continued even after the Los Angeles Times and other media outlets have identified Rubio as the only possible person accused in a plea deal of taking illegal campaign contributions and soliciting bribes in a sprawling marijuana pay-to-play scheme, which has ensnared several local officials.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Rubio opened the defense fund in early 2024, collecting at least $161,000 in contributions so far, as well as $85,000 in loans from her Senate campaign committee. She has used the funds to pay at least $95,000 to a Los Angeles-based law firm Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump Holley LLP, or KWIKH, which specializes in entertainment law and civil and criminal defense cases, and another $9,000 to Nossaman LLP, a national law firm with a range of legal practices, including litigation. Another $127,000 in payments to KWIKH came from Rubio’s Senate campaign committee.

The same year she opened the defense fund, Rubio, who previously served on Baldwin Park’s city council, said she was questioned in the federal marijuana bribery public corruption probe. Her ex-husband, whom she has repeatedly accused of domestic violence, also was suing her for defamation at the time.

The public silence about the legal set-up and payments is striking because the federal probe has been anything but quiet. In August, the Los Angeles Times ran the headline: “Cash buried in L.A. politician’s backyard helped expose marijuana corruption scheme.”

The cash in the backyard

The “L.A. politician” in question is Baldwin Park Councilmember Ricardo Pacheco, who buried nearly $63,000 in illicit cash in his backyard amid the “green rush” of marijuana legalization a decade ago. After federal agents found the money, Pacheco began cooperating with the government. His cooperation helped open a wide FBI investigation into bribes paid for marijuana permits and political favors across Los Angeles County and beyond.

Officials in Compton, Commerce, and San Bernardino County have since pleaded guilty. So has Baldwin Park’s former city attorney. His unsealed plea agreement describes an unnamed official identified as “Person 20.” It says Person 20 took $30,000 in illegal campaign contributions and asked a cannabis company for a $240,000 bribe.

In December 2024, the Los Angeles Times reported that only one person fits that description: Susan Rubio. She served on the Baldwin Park city council with Pacheco before winning her Senate seat in 2018. The investigation is ongoing. Rubio, who says the FBI has told her she is not a target of the probe, has not been charged and has denied taking bribes.

Two legal fights, one pot of donor money

Amid the federal probe, Rubio was fighting a defamation lawsuit from her ex-husband, former Assemblyman Roger Hernandez. She won it in 2025 and has paid her lawyers with donor money from two sources: the legal defense fund and her Senate campaign committee.

California law allows a legal defense fund to pay for an elected officials’ attorneys when a case arises directly from a campaign, legislative, or official duties. If any federal allegations are filed in the marijuana bribery case, those would involve Rubio’s time on the city council and her 2018 Senate campaign, so they may meet that test. But the Hernandez suit grew out of a marriage that ended a decade ago amid domestic violence accusations. That’s a tougher fit, according to legal experts familiar with California campaign finance law, but it’s the explanation she has cited.

Click here to read the full article at Real Clear Politics

Speak Your Mind