- About
About USC Gould
USC Gould is a top-ranked law school with a 120-year history and reputation for academic excellence. We are located on the beautiful 228-acre USC University Park Campus, just south of downtown Los Angeles.
- Academics
Academics
Learn about our interdisciplinary curriculum, experiential learning opportunities and specialized areas.
Student Quick Links:
- Admissions
Admissions
USC Gould helps prepare you for a stellar legal career. You can pursue a JD degree, one of our numerous graduate and international offerings, or an online degree or certificate.
- Students
Students
Participate in an unparalleled learning experience with diversity of people and thought. Get involved in the law school community and participate in activities that enhance your studies.
Student Quick Links:
- Careers
Careers
We work closely with students, graduates and employers to support successful career goals and outcomes. Our overall placement rate is consistently strong, with 94 percent of our JD class employed within 10 months after graduation.
- Faculty
Faculty
Our faculty is distinguished for its scholarship, as well as for its commitment to teaching. Our 12:1 student-to-faculty ratio creates an intimate and collegial learning environment.
- Alumni and Giving
- Admissions

Professor Abby Wood invited to testify before Senate committee about ‘dark money’ and disclosures
USC Gould School of Law
- ABOUT USC GOULD
- A MESSAGE FROM THE DEAN
- + HISTORY OF USC GOULD
- LAW, RACE AND EQUITY
- + NEWS
- + EVENTS
- BOARD OF COUNCILORS
- CONSUMER INFORMATION (ABA REQUIRED DISCLOSURES)
- VISIT US
- SOCIAL MEDIA
- + CONTACT US
Wednesday, May 11, 2022
![]() |
Wood joined law and political science scholars and experts on campaign finance laws to testify about the effects of “dark money” in the federal judiciary. |
Abby Wood, professor of law, political science and public policy at the USC Gould School of Law, was asked to provide expert testimony on transparency and accountability in the courts before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary – Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights. The hearing took place May 3 in Washington, D.C.
Wood was invited to testify about the effects of “dark money” – political spending from groups that do not disclose the identity of donors – in the federal judiciary, and whether this practice erodes trust in the courts. She joined a panel of four other law and political science scholars and experts on campaign finance laws.
Wood, well known for her research on campaign financing and administrative law, emphasized three points in her testimony: how disclosures affect decision-making and why sources of amicus briefs should be disclosed; that claims that disclosure discourages free speech are disproportionate to any “chilling” of speech that actually occurs; and that dark money chips away at political trust.
“Well-designed disclosures can help us decide how to vote, what to buy, where to eat, which doctors and financial advisors to trust, and yes, which judges and justices and amici to trust as well,” Wood said.
Asked by committee Chairman Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse to explain why amicus disclosure is important, Wood noted that anonymous amici allow parties to get around page limits for briefs and slip in supplementary arguments, defeating the adversarial aspect of the legal system. Circling back to a previous argument that decision-making depends on knowledge about sources, Wood said disclosures can make the difference between justices reading or setting aside an amicus brief.
“We already know from something that Justice Ginsburg said a while back, that they put them in three piles – ‘don’t read, maybe read, definitely read,’” she said. The financial “source of the actual argument that comes before the court via an amicus might affect which pile it goes in. I think [disclosure is] really crucial.”
In written testimony, Wood referred to her 2015 survey of 2,000 adults of voting age about campaign features including disclosures of funding sources and support from outside groups, among other things. Campaign finance disclosure emerged as a top concern among these voters, she said.
“It's important to understand the phases of how dark money is involved in our judicial process, even if not all of it can be regulated successfully,” said Wood, reflecting later on her testimony. She noted how dark money groups are a significant part of the vetting process, and explained that these groups also “spend a lot of money in support of, or opposing, the nominees during the confirmation process.”
Wood added, “they are involved both as parties before the court and as amici, or friends of the court. To make matters more complicated, sometimes the amicus writers have financial support from dark money sources – some of which might be parties in the same case or might support the parties of the case.”
The day before the hearing, a draft decision from the U.S. Supreme Court that would overturn Roe v. Wade was leaked and took center stage in national discourse.
Wood was asked by ranking member Sen. John Kennedy for her opinion on how the leak affects the legitimacy of SCOTUS.
“I think that the substance of the leak, which shows that the court is going against the majority of the country, is much more damaging to the legitimacy than the leak itself,” Wood said.
Read More
- Next Article: Clerkships dominate the conversation at 2022 Jurist-in-Residence visit
- Previous Article: A long journey to good works
RECENT NEWS

USC Gould Law Library showcases ‘rejuvenating power of music’
June 2, 2023
Performances feature LA Philharmonic concertmaster, saxophone quartet

‘The Best Beloved Thing is Justice’
June 1, 2023
New book by Gould alum Lisa Kloppenberg celebrates life of Judge and former Dean Dorothy W. Nelson

USC Gould Title IX trailblazer works to put more women in leadership roles
May 30, 2023
"If we can continue moving forward, the future is very bright," says Associate Dean Nickey Woods