Issuu

Dark Money in the American Judicial System Center for American Institutions Arizona State University Published September 2026

Table of Contents Executive Introduction

The Erosion of Trust in Our Judiciary

Differences in Democratic and Republican Spending: State Supreme Courts

District Attorneys and Reform

Extending Reform Prosecution

Media

Conclusion

Executive Introduction

Restoring Trust in Our Judiciary Across the country, dark money floods into elections for state supreme court justices and city and county prosecutors. In 2025, the ASU Center for American Institutions (CAI) issued a national commission report, The Politicization of Our Courts on dark money affecting state supreme court elections (https://cai.asu.edu/courts). Our findings led CAI to examine the extent of dark money in other judicial elections. The results of our investigation detailed in this report are alarming. Our report makes a unique contribution by focusing on dark money across the judicial system. Until recently, judicial elections attracted little attention from voters and were low-cost campaigns. New ideological funding in the 2010s changed the playbook. As dark money poured into judicial elections, campaign costs soared. More importantly, candidates projected ideological messaging. Judicial experience mattered less than where the candidate stood on social justice issues. Much of the cash flowing into judicial campaigns comes from dark money – contributions directed to super political action committees (PACs) or passed through 501(c) “charitable” organizations that are not required to disclose their donors. A 501(c) refers to a specific section of the United States Internal Revenue Code that grants federal tax-exempt status to nonprofit organizations. There are nearly 30 different types of 501(c) entities, each serving distinct purposes and operating under different Internal Revenue Service rules. The Brennan Center for Justice reports that in 2024, such spending reached a new $1.9 billion record.1

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/dark-money-hit-record-high-19-billion-2024-federal-races

A web linked by ideology and fueled by massive contributions enveloped candidates for judicial as well as political offices. Elaborate networks that included super PACs, 501(c) nonprofit organizations, and affiliated groups that supplied public relations advice and other services are one-stop shops for everything a candidate could need. For the winners, ongoing networking and training completes the package. No relevant experience is required. The intricate nesting of ideologically driven “charitable” organizations, political activists, and opaque funding pass-through groups is a progressive specialty. Arabella Advisors – recently reconfigured as Sunflower Services – and billionaire George Soros’ various groups are the biggest and most complete political/financial complexes. There are many others, though. In 2016, Politico magazine announced the arrival of Soros’ “quiet overhaul of the justice system.” 2 In the 2015-2016 election cycle, Soros-related funds and nonprofits had spent $3 million on seven district attorney races in six states. That amount of money jolted what usually had been low-cost contests. For Soros, electing district attorneys was another way to accomplish his policy agenda – the legalization of street drugs, cashless bail, alternative sentencing, and other reforms that he believed would correct a criminal justice system that incarcerated too many and failed to punish police misconduct. Rather than wait for the tedious process of electing state and local officials to produce results, electing district attorneys was the direct route to policy change. With their awesome discretion over charges, district attorneys could achieve progressive policy goals fast and on the cheap. Republican candidates make use of dark money, but they lack the ideological structure that makes the Democratic system special. Nothing in the Republican stable matches the Democratic Party’s network of interlocking nonprofits that are prolific in spinning off new nonprofits. Those groups cover the whole of political organization, from the press to voter registration and turnout. Nineteenth century political machines pale compared to the Democratic-connected dark money today. Actually, the progressive network that has emerged in the last decade makes the Democratic Party nearly irrelevant except for an automatic place on the ballot and a handy label for voters. Political scientists speak of an “iron triangle” of congressional committees, interest groups, and federal bureaucrats dominating public policy without public oversight. We now see a new type of iron triangle connecting nonprofits, foundations, and activists. It reaches from the federal executive branch down through the formerly forgotten state and local and judicial elections.

Donald T. Critchlow Director, Center for American Institutions

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/george-soros-criminal-justice-reform-227519

The Erosion of Trust in Our Judiciary

Introduction The flood of dark money into judicial elections has turned our judicial system into an intense financial and political battleground, which has contributed to further erosion of public trust in our courts. Nothing is more fundamental to trust in our institutions than the rule of law. If citizens cannot count on courts and prosecutors to deal fairly – to punish criminals and to apply the law impartially – we will have lost the possibility of a functioning democratic polity. America’s trust in its legal system has been declining at an alarming rate. The partisan polarization that has consumed American politics extends to the courts. The Supreme Court of the United States, the most visible piece of the justice system, now commands the trust of fewer than half of Americans according to recent national surveys.3 Views of the Court are sharply divided by party, with a 47 percent gap between Republicans and Democrats on the trustworthiness of the Court.4 Partisan and ideological polarization erodes trust in our judiciary system through the explosion of ideologically motivated spending on political campaigns.

Recommendations: Barring the unlikely event of a thorough reform of the campaign finance system and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules governing nonprofit organizations, smaller actions could make a significant difference. • Expand Congressional House hearings on potentially illegal foreign money passed through nonprofits to political campaigns with investigations and prosecution.5 • Direct effective media attention to dark money networks that shape the decisions of justices and prosecutors. • Encourage voters to show up in what are often low-turnout elections. In gathering information to make an informed decision, an extra step to learn about the sources of information – who or what is funding the news – is now all the more important.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/511820/views-supreme-court-remain-near-record-lows.aspx; https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/08/favorable-views-of-supreme-court-remain-near-historic-low/; https://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/trust-in-us-supreme-court-continues-to-sink/ 4 https://news.gallup.com/poll/651527/party-divisions-views-supreme-court-keep-ratings-low.aspx 5 https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2026/02/12/six-key-moments-hearing-on-foreign-influence-in-american-non-profitsunmasking-threats-from-beijing-and-beyond/ 3

What is dark money? The United States Supreme Court ruled in Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) that spending on political campaigns falls under the right to free speech. That speech is regulated through contribution limits, disclosure, and restrictions on coordination with candidates. Individual contributions are limited and disclosed. In 2025-2026, individuals can contribute no more than $3,000 in a primary and $3,500 to a federal candidate’s campaign in a general election cycle. They can also contribute $44,300 to a national party committee, $10,000 to state or local parties, and $5,000 to PACs. Citizens United enabled nonprofit and for-profit corporations and other groups to spend unlimited money on elections but cannot coordinate with candidates or parties. Super PACs (527 groups by tax code location) can raise and spend unlimited sums collected from individuals, corporations, unions, foundations, other super PACs, and nonprofits. These organizations are created to support a specific candidate or a specific cause. Disclosure of these donations is partial. Super PAC funding sources are disclosed, but sometimes not until after elections. Even then, contributions from dark money sources inform us of how much money came in, but not exactly where the donations came from beyond the name of the group donating the funds. Those dark money contributors are nonprofits known by their tax code designations. 501(c)(4) “social welfare” organizations are supposed to devote a “substantial” amount of their effort toward activities that advance the public good. So long as the group’s work is not directly supporting or opposing a candidate or party, it is permissible. Contributions to such groups are not tax deductible, in contrast to 501(c)(3) groups. Most of these “charitable” organizations are educational, religious, or scientific groups. While prohibited from political activity, these groups can run get-out-the-vote drives or candidate forums, as long as they appear nonpartisan. Lobbying is also permissible if it does not take up a substantial portion of the budget. Large politically active foundations and social welfare groups create both types of organizations. This allows coordination among the various organizations. For example, “charitable” organizations slide money over to the “social welfare” siblings and other 527s.

Differences in Democratic and Republican Spending: State Supreme Courts 8

Differences in Democratic and Republican Spending: State Supreme Courts Party discipline rests on cash. Today within the Democratic Party rests an iron triangle of nonprofits, foundations, and activist groups that maintain ideology and issue discipline.6 Democrats today rely on a broad and deep network of foundations and nonprofits that not only funnel money to campaigns, but in the judicial field, provide public relations help, networking, ongoing training, and legal assistance for state-level suits to press forward on issues such as climate change, gender, and civil rights. One snapshot, the 2023-24 election cycle that featured numerous competitive state supreme court races, illustrates the differences in the Republican and Democratic styles in finance and organization. Both parties’ candidates benefited from previously unheard-of amounts of money, much of it from independent groups. Republican spending tended to flow from a few wealthy individuals and to Republican party-directed groups. Democratic spending moved through well-known advocacy organizations, which in turn distributed dark money funds.7

Elections in 2023-24 State

Group

Candidates Supported

Total Spent

Alabama Arizona Pennsylvania Wisconsin

Fair Courts America

Republican/nonpartisan

$7,477,603

Michigan Montana Pennsylvania Wisconsin

ACLU

Democratic/nonpartisan

$6,592,250

Kentucky Michigan Montana North Carolina Pennsylvania Wisconsin

Planned Parenthood Votes

Democratic/nonpartisan

$5,867,701

Michigan Montana Ohio Pennsylvania Wisconsin

RSLC-JFI

Republican/nonpartisan

$3,085,403

Michigan Pennsylvania Wisconsin

Everytown for Gun Safety

Democratic/nonpartisan

$1,355,074

Note: In Alabama, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, candidates run in partisan judicial elections. In Michigan candidates run in a nonpartisan general election but are nominated by political parties at party conventions. In Arizona, Kentucky, Montana, and Wisconsin, candidates run in nonpartisan judicial elections. For a complete description of the judicial selection process in each state, visit brennancenter.org/judicial-selection-map. Source: Brennan Center analysis. 6 7

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/08/19/democrats-unity-gop-2024-dnc-00174525 https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/politics-judicial-elections-2023-24

Fair Courts America has one major funder, Richard Uihlein, an Illinois businessman with roots in Wisconsin.8 Giving millions is giving big money, but it is not dark money. His funding of Fair Courts America is disclosed. Restoration PAC, a 501(c)(4), also largely funded by Uihlein, has been active in state supreme court elections and in producing and distributing campaign newspapers.9 The top Democratic contributors are dark money conduits including the following: Planned Parenthood Votes is one of three politically active groups spun off of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, a 501(c)(3) organization. The Votes arm is a super PAC; it is joined by the Action Fund, a 501(c)(4), and the Action Fund PAC.10 Planned Parenthood’s Action Fund also contributed more than a half million dollars. In the 2023-24 election cycle, Democracy PAC contributed $2.5 million.11 Founded by George Soros to support Democrats in the 2020 election, its largest contribution, $70 million in 2023-24, came from another Soros group, the Fund for Policy Reform. Soros himself contributed, along with one of his Safety and Justice PACs. A shadowy entity incorporated in Delaware, Global Oaks Holding LLC, also gave generously. Who or what it represents is unclear.12 Democracy PAC was also the top donor to the ACLU in 2024, which, through its state affiliates and Educational Fund, helped to drive the massive spending on state supreme court elections in this cycle.13 While the signature of the Soros judicial strategy is flooding cheaper prosecutor elections, donations to progressive state supreme court justice candidates accomplish the same purpose, and perhaps even more effectively. Familiar brand-name organizations obscure the Soros criminal-justice reform fingerprints. The Judicial Fairness Initiative, a project of the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC), was the second-largest spender on the Republican side. The RSLC was established in 2002 with the mission of strengthening Republicans in state house races. Through the Judicial Fairness Initiative, the RSLC supports state supreme court nominees, fighting Democratic efforts “to transform the traditional role of the judiciary from an arbiter of the facts and the law to an advocate for the liberal political agenda.”14 The RSLC appears to be the only donor to the Judicial Fairness Initiative, unlike other progressive PACs that have multiple donors going through a conduit of other organizations.15

https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/fair-courts-america/C00805283/donors/2024 https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2024/10/31/restoration-superpac-downers-grove-presidential-election-dougtruax-richard-uihlein 10 https://ballotpedia.org/Planned_Parenthood_Votes 11 https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?data_type=processed&committee_id=C00489799&two_year_transaction_period=2024 12 https://www.influencewatch.org/political-party/democracy-pac/ 13 https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/detail/2024?cmte=American+Civil+Liberties+Union++++++++++& tab=donors_all 14 https://rslc.gop/state-officials/?_branch=state-courts#jfi 15 https://projects.propublica.org/527-explorer/orgs/471531928/ 8 9

The Judicial Fairness Initiative has been active in numerous state supreme court campaigns since its formation in 2014. Dark money arrives through the RSLC. Since the RSLC does not indicate whether donors directed contributions to particular purposes, it is not possible to trace dark money to the Judicial Fairness Initiative, much less to individual state campaigns. The best-known dark money contributor to the RSLC is the Concord Group, connected to Leonard Leo, former vice president of the Federalist Society. The Concord Fund contributed more than $3 million in 2023-2024. That effort appears to be a one-off: in the years before and after, the Concord Fund contributed either nothing or a comparatively negligible sum.16 In the 2023-2024 cycle the Concord Fund was one of 7 donors that contributed at least $1 million.17 These state supreme court elections illustrate the distinctive approach of Democrats and Republicans in campaign finance. • Progressives make far more extensive use of complex dark money channels than conservatives. • Republican finance relies on party-linked organizations and single wealthy individuals. The Democrats have a counterpart to the RSLC, the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.18 It had no prominent role in these state supreme court campaigns. • Progressives benefit from lock-step agreement on policy. While a casual reader might assume that Planned Parenthood, Everytown for Gun Safety, and the ACLU have distinct policy concerns, a Soros-linked nonprofit or PAC can invest in any or all of them with confidence. A judge or justice elected with the backing of any of those groups can be assumed to support the full range of progressive causes. • Working through such recognizable organizations as Planned Parenthood reduces the likelihood that a judge or justice will be tagged as a Soros product.

https://projects.propublica.org/527-explorer/orgs/050532524 https://projects.propublica.org/527-explorer/orgs/050532524 18 https://www.dlcc.org/about/ 16 17

Dark Money Networks Both parties have built webs of dark money organizations. But the Democratic system far outstrips Republicans in coordination, size, and reach.

The Republicans Prior to 2012, the Republican Party’s unified fundraising and spending bought advertising and superior get-out-the-vote efforts that underpinned party discipline. The centerpiece was party-directed fundraising and resources focused on building state and local organizations. The party developed databases superior to anything the Democrats had.19 The best-known dark money organizations aligned with the Republicans were associated with libertarian industrialists Charles and David Koch. Their first foray dated to the Foundation for a Sound Economy in 1984, reconfigured in 1988 as Citizens for a Sound Economy, a 501(c)(4) group. In 2004, the Koch brothers created Americans for Prosperity (with both types of charitable/social welfare affiliates), and FreedomWorks. Americans for Prosperity, usually among the top 25 of groups spending independently of the parties, became the poster child for warnings from the left about the danger to democracy posed by dark money.20 The Koch brothers imparted a libertarian agenda to their organizations. This agenda included open borders, criminal justice reform and free markets. In this period, alignment between party and independent funding imposed general, although not absolute, discipline within the GOP. Crossroads GPS and its related PACs, American Crossroads and Senate Leadership Fund, provided strategic advice and funds to Republican candidates. Founded by Karl Rove, former political advisor to George W. Bush, and Ed Gillespie, former Republican National Committee chair, these groups peaked in 2012, spending nearly $71 million through its related organizations.21 Drawing on the largess of a few Texas billionaires, its positions were classic mainstream Republican: tax cuts, judicious reforms to entitlement and other spending, removing barriers to oil and gas production, and a path to citizenship for immigrants in the United States illegally while tightening the border.22 In 2015, Rove established One Nation, a 501(c)(4) which continued its support of mainstream Republican issues such as tax reform and restraining excessive government spending.23 One Nation maintained links to the Senate Leadership Fund.24

Republican coordination and support of state parties was stronger before the McCain-Feingold reforms of the 1990s had the ironic effect of strengthening super PACs. Raymond J. La Raja, Small Change: Money, Political Parties, and Campaign Finance Reform (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2008). 20 Jane Mayer, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, (New York: Doubleday, 2016) is the classic, if overwrought account that appeared just as the Koch footprint in Republican circles was shrinking. 21 https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/11/karl-rove-crossroads-gps-is-dead-long-live-dark-money-operation/ 22 https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/crossroads-gps/ 23 https://www.onenationamerica.org/issues/; also, https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/11/karl-rove-crossroads-gpsis-dead-long-live-dark-money-operation/ 24 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/271937961/202513189349312806/full 19

As a populist surge remade the conservative coalition and the GOP, the conservative and Republican-aligned financial edifice fragmented as well. Koch groups retreated from the presidential race in 2016. Donors friendlier toward Donald Trump withdrew support from Koch organizations. The rise of populism within the Republican Party led by Donald Trump caused tensions between the leadership of these organizations and the grassroots. In 2024, Koch withdrew funding from FreedomWorks, which led to the demise of this organization.25 The Kochs’ consistent interest in criminal justice reform and immigration led to support for at least one Democrat and for social justice nonprofits.26 Charles Koch and George Soros have together funded a foreign policy think tank, the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, with the goal of encouraging a less militarized America.27 While Republicans raise and spend dark money, Democrats have outpaced Republicans in both coordination and amounts spent since 2018.28

Republican Dark Money in Judicial Elections The networks discussed above largely focus on congressional, presidential, and state legislative races. Republican dark money in judicial races appears to be confined to advertising in connection with Supreme Court nominations and state supreme court elections. The 85 Fund and the Concord Fund, two interrelated non-profit 501(c) charities, provide a major conduit for conservative independent expenditures into judicial elections and appointments. Leonard Leo, an attorney, and former vice-president of the Federalist Society, is the mastermind behind both The 85 Fund and the Concord Fund. Unlike the Koch brothers, his power does not rest in personal wealth, but his connections within the conservative hemisphere.29 Leo is best known for helping to generate a vetted list of potential judges and justices for the first Trump administration and working on a public relations campaign to see the nominations through.30 News stories have touted his reach – “Leo-connected” is a headline even when his role, if any, is unclear.31 One story, for example, made much of his nefarious role in remaking federal and state courts.32 Yet the claim that Leo’s groups were top funders of state supreme court campaigns could not be verified through tax filings.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/05/08/freedomworks-is-closing-and-blaming-trump-00156784 https://time.com/5491587/koch-brothers-network-immigration-reform/ 27 https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/02/george-soros-and-charles-koch-take-on-the-endless-wars-074737 28 https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/dark-money-hit-record-high-19-billion-2024-federal-races 29 https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/us/politics/leonard-leo-network.html 30 https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/leonard-leo-federalists-society-courts/ 31 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/leonard-leo-koch-networks-pour-millions-prep-potential-secondtrump-ad-rcna144360 32 https://truenorthresearch.org/report/wisconsin-supreme-court-capture-leonard-leo-tied-dark-money-judicial-crisisnetwork-rslc/ 25

Leo was also accused of self-dealing in running contracts from political nonprofits to his for-profit business.33 One organization to which he is linked and which paid his business for services, gave grants to free speech and center-right foundations unconnected to election activity.34 The salaries and fees he reportedly collected seem to be on par for network-builders serving both parties. No doubt, Leo is a well-connected and compensated political operative with close associates in the tight world of conservative D.C. lawyers. He guides a group of nonprofits that support center-right foundations and seek to elect Republican state supreme court justices and have supported or opposed United States Supreme Court nominees. Leo may well have ambitions to create a network to rival those that control progressive Democrats and their causes, but it does not appear to have reached either the sheer amount of money or the reach into all aspects of campaigns.35 The central conservative dark money organization connected to Leo is the Concord Group, formerly the Judicial Confirmation Network and the Judicial Crisis Network. Formed initially to support President George W. Bush’s Supreme Court nominees, under its new name it opposed Democratic nominees. As the Concord Fund, like its predecessors a 501(c)(4) organization, it continued work on United States Supreme Court nominations. The Concord Fund is also active in state supreme court elections. They make grants to Republican party-linked organizations, such as the Judicial Fairness Initiative. In Oklahoma, for example, conservative groups led by the nonprofit affiliate of a state think tank, campaigned against the retention of three state supreme court justices in 2024. The Concord Fund gave the affiliate (which spent $1.5 million) $450,000 in 2023.36 In a campaign in which spending on both sides was close to equal, one of the three justices lost. In judicial elections, single donors, such as Richard Uihlein and Pennsylvania’s Jeff Yass, have been the major contributors. Yass has made 56 contributions over $5,000 in the 2025-2026 cycle so far, spanning candidate PACs and super PACs, along with state parties.37 Yass-funded groups have contributed to candidates and organizations supporting such issues as school choice and repealing Alaska’s ranked-choice voting system.38

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/07/nonprofit-leonard-leo-00162364 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/202466871/202313199349307191/IRS990ScheduleI 35 https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/22/us/politics/republican-dark-money.html; https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/ us/politics/leonard-leo-network.html 36 https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/anonymous-groups-are-spending-big-in-oklahoma-supreme-court-justiceretention-races/ 37 https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual- contributions/?contributor_name=jeff+yass&two_year_transaction_ period=2026&min_amount=5%2C001. He made 711 contributions in the 2024 cycle to PACs, super PACs, candidates, and state and national party organizations. 38 https://www.campaignmoney.com/political/527/students-first-pac.asp; https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/ C00907584/?tab=raising 33

His Commonwealth Leadership Fund and related organizations that champion school choice have been active in numerous state supreme court and retention campaigns. His groups, which he funds almost entirely, have spent significant sums in Ohio and Arizona as well as Pennsylvania.39 In a first for his recent investments in politics, Elon Musk weighed in on the 2025 Wisconsin state supreme court election. Adding to the record-breaking $67.1 million spent on that election, his Building America’s Future PAC spent $2.2 million late in the campaign.40 It was not late enough to prevent Musk’s contribution from becoming a focus for new Democratic negative ads in an ad-soaked state. More often than not, the contributions of individual rich conservatives or those supporting conservative candidates or causes were simply big money rather than dark money. While a Yass organization check sent to the Republican State Leadership Committee might be used for any number of projects they support, it does not take much digging to connect the check to Yass. In short, the hallmarks of the Republican style in judicial elections include the following: • Use of the full array of outside funding mechanisms – PACs, super PACs, 527s, donor-advised funds, and the various, sometimes linked 501(c)(3) nonprofits. • Party-linked organizations, including Republican PACs and super PACs, spent liberally on state supreme court elections. They drew on contributions from individuals as well as 501(c)(3) organizations and other PACs, super PACs, and 527 groups. • Leonard Leo’s network may have ambitions to match the range and reach of their Democratic counterparts. Currently it has neither the scope nor the resources. • There does not appear to be much coordination among Republican donors except generally through the Republican Party. Donors to the Republican Party and NGOs often overlap. • Republicans, like Democrats, have a partisan state attorney general association. But there appears to be no ongoing ideological training by Republicans for candidates for lower judicial races. • Progressives and conservatives have networks to recruit and train candidates seeking judicial positions. Conservatives can draw from organizations such as the Federalist Society. Progressives are better organized to develop and train judicial candidates through a complex network of charitable foundations that fund activist organizations.41

https://www.mcall.com/2023/11/15/spending-on-pa-supreme-court-race-broke-records-set-precedent-for-outsideinfluence/; https://www.cleveland.com/open/2026/02/five-groups-poured-millions-in-dark-money-into-2024-ohiosupreme-court-races-study-finds.html 40 https://adimpact.com/blogs/2025-wisconsin-supreme-court-race 41 Scott Walter, Arabella: The Dark Money Network of Leftist Billionaires Secretly Transforming America (New York: Encounter, 2024), p.135-136. 39

The Democrats In the 2010s, the Democrats became the party of nonprofits, foundations, and activists, – “the groups” – richly funded by dark money sources. Democratic politicians began to follow rather than lead their donors. The machine donors spawned generated policy, publicity, get-out-the-vote efforts and “civic engagement,” which meant everything from standing up “grassroots” organizations to protests. While the Democratic party would remain as a helpful label for voters, the new iron triangle would in essence replace it. The remarkable discipline of progressive Democratic politics starts with coordination at the top. The reelection of George W. Bush in 2004 convinced many deep-pocket Democratic donors that they were losing the political war with the Republican Party. The problem, as they saw it, was the ineptitude of the Democratic party and politicians, who took the billionaires’ money but not their advice. In 2005, wealthy donors decided to act to exert their political influence through pooling their money and setting a political agenda. Democracy Alliance was born. Democracy Alliance is a mostly secret collection of billionaires joined, as the group developed, by foundations and unions that pledged at least $200,000 as the price of admission to the club. As a “taxable nonprofit,” Democracy Alliance does not make direct grants and also avoids IRS reporting complications. Instead, it directs members’ contributions to organizations that will carry out the agreed-upon activities and agendas. While its website lists the organization’s leadership (drawn from foundations, activist networks, finance, and unions), its membership is not publicly available.42 Reported members include co-founder billionaire financier George Soros, Taco Bell heir Rob McKay, and “some of the biggest names in liberal politics.”43 Democracy Alliance helps set the agenda for Democrats at its conferences. Presentations sketch out the issues and the constituencies that funding should target and the types of nonprofits best suited to carry out the work.44 With a plan in hand, Democracy Alliance directs staggering amounts of money from its members to curated activist networks, super PACs, and nonprofits. As the major push to move the Democratic Party leftward after the election of Donald Trump in 2016 gained steam, Democracy Alliance amassed $600 million.45 In the run up to the 2020 election, Democracy Alliance and one of its offshoots, the Strategic Victory Fund, a super-PAC, upped the ante. Strategic Victory raised $275 million for organizing in swing states to elect progressives at the state and local levels. Rural communities were singled out for “civic engagement and progressive agenda development.”46 https://democracyalliance.org/about/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2015/04/12/democracy-alliance-to-direct-millions-to-30liberal-groups/25672531/ 44 Scott Walter’s Arabella: The Dark Money Network of Leftists Billionaires Secretly Transforming America provides an invaluable roadmap through the intricate progressive funding networks. 45 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/07/us/politics/democrats-resistance-fundraising.html 46 https://freebeacon.com/democrats/soros-donor-network-quietly-launched-new-big-money-entities/ 42

Arabella Advisors Among the networks that captured Democracy Alliance donor funds was Arabella Advisors, recently reconstituted as Sunflower Services. The Capital Research Center brought to light the extent of the Arabella network, which led to congressional investigations, as well as the departure of mega donors such as Bill Gates.47 Arabella was a consulting company that provided back-of-the-house services, such as human resources, accounting, and compliance along with strategy and investing to nonprofits and other entities.48 It was also the nation’s dark money juggernaut.49 The network consisted of a complex set of connections among the affiliated nonprofits, which generated hefty payments back to Arabella in the form of fees for its consulting services. Each of the affiliates had a signature focus, such as environmental protection or social justice. The nonprofits sending grants to sister nonprofits made tracing the source of the funds all the harder. Through the 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups in its network, Arabella raised $1.7 billion for the 2020 elections, a “blowout” haul of dark money, doubling the 2019 total.”50 In 2024, contributions dropped to $1.5 billion.51 The Capital Research Center graph from 2022 illustrates the interconnections.52 Arabella’s partnership with the various funds ran deep enough to include shared leadership and addresses.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/26/us/politics/gates-foundation-democrats-arabella-advisors.html https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/investigations/4050359/fluctuating-left-wing-premier-dark-money-network/ 49 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2638545/democratic-dark-money-juggernaut-behind-biden-allied-grouptargeting-house-gop/ 50 https://capitalresearch.org/article/breaking-arabellas-left-wing-activist-network-raked-in-1-7-billion-in-2020-a-darkmoney-blowout/ 51 https://www.campaignnow.com/blog/the-1.5-billion-machine-inside-arabella-advisors-2024-dark-money-blitz-and-itsballot-box-results 52 https://capitalresearch.org/article/we-broke-new-ground-on-arabellas-dark-money-in-2022/ 47

Arabella’s Financial Shell Game

$98.2M total shuffled in 2021, including management fees

NEW VENTURE FUND

5 22

.5M

9 $3

$4 70 K

7.2 M

$29.7M

2.9

$150K

WINDWARD FUND

.2M

M $5

$1 .1M

$552K

ARABELLA ADVISORS

$1 .9 M

$4.2M

NORTH FUND

HOPEWELL FUND

$3M $215K

SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND

Source: Capital Research Center. For more information, visit: capitalresearch.org/tag/arabella-advisors/

Arabella created a prolific number of new projects, sponsored by one of the fund’s existing affiliates within the network. Through targeted funding flowing through each of these charitable foundations, progressive activist groups are created and sustained. In this way, Arabella added rocket fuel to the conventional practice of “incubation.” Popup groups with innocuous sounding names sprang up to give the appearance of a grassroots citizen response to a prominent political issue – a Supreme Court nomination or a state ballot question – or a political campaign. But the groups had little more than a website: no members or anything more than nominal contributions from small donors. Many of these organizations were recipients of a massive single grant, but after having fulfilled its mission, they disappeared. Often this occurred even before the IRS reviewed the grant. Operatives for these organizations moved on to the next project funded through the Arabella network.53 The extent of this network is captured in the table on the right. While Arabella popup projects tended to focus on narrow policy topics – ballot questions, legislative redistricting, ballot access, D.C. statehood, and debates on specific pieces of legislation – resources have been directed to judiciary fights. Opposition to Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominations called for the most attention-grabbing actions. Demand Justice, for example, a popup that later graduated to an independent nonprofit with an attached super PAC, arranged for the Handmaid’s Tale-costumed protesters outside the Supreme Court building to demonstrate their opposition to the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh, among other stunts.54 Arabella’s Sixteen Thirty Fund contributed to the rush of outside money flooding into state supreme court races. In the record-breaking 2025 Wisconsin election, the Fund passed $1 million to the A Better Wisconsin Together Political Fund, nearly 11 percent of the total it spent on the campaign.55 In 2022, another $500,000 went to Keep Kansas Courts Impartial, which ran ads in favor of the retention of the state’s justices appointed by Democrats – a large sum in a race in which spending usually was closer to zero than a half million.56

https://capitalresearch.org/publication/big-money-in-dark-shadows/ https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/for-profit-dc-firm-staging-americas-grassroots-movementsarabella-advisors 55 https://thefederalist.com/2025/04/01/report-foreign-funded-dark-money-group-shelled-out-1-million-to-elect-wisconsinleftist-susan-crawford/ 56 https://watchdoglab.substack.com/p/over-6-million-in-arabella-advisors 53

Equity Forward Get America Covered Economic Security Project Other Projects

HCAN Ed Fund

HCAN

Obamacare Groups

Save My Care

All Above All

Keep Birth Control Copay Free

Allied Progress Media Democracy Fund Make It Work Campaign Civic Engagement Fund Fix the Court

All Above All Action Fund Allied Progress Action Media Democracy Action Fund

Other Projects

Health Care Voter State Obamacare Groups

Make It Work Action Civic Engagement Action Fund Demand Justice

Restore Public Trust

Tax Policy General/ Social Policy

Source: Capital Research Center

Protect Our Care

Climate Resilience Fund

Tax March

Lady Parts Justice

Not One Penny

The Love Vote

Business for Responsible Tax Reform

Where did Arabella’s money come from? The picture of who or what gifted Arabella with its massive war chest is incomplete. Its structural design aims to defeat transparency. Still, the known major donors included the luminaries of the foundation world: Bill Gates (until his foundation severed ties with Arabella in 2025), the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Packard and Hewlett foundations, and the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation. Various Mark Zuckerberg-funded nonprofits and foundations were among the major donors.57 Silicon Valley Community Foundation also chipped in. Other big contributions were buried even further from view through a donor-advised fund, the Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund.58 The most controversial, and potentially illegal, donations came from the Berger Action Fund. Foreign funding of American elections is banned, but the fund is underwritten almost entirely by Hansjörg Wyss, a Swiss billionaire.59 His fund contributed “hundreds of millions of dollars” to the Sixteen Thirty Fund according to an Americans for Public Trust report.60 That money likely found its way to the nonprofits pumping out ads in the Wisconsin state supreme court 2025 campaign. Still, the specific purposes donors targeted with their grants remained hidden: the IRS forms show only totals for grants given. What is not revealed, however, are specifics of a grant other than vague wording such as “community outreach.” Also, not revealed were donors contributing to Arabella-aligned nonprofits. While foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to candidates or super PACs, many of the nonprofits that benefited from Arabella funding worked on ballot initiatives, redistricting campaigns, and ballot access proposals. The Sixteen Thirty Fund provided ample cover for politically-oriented grants. Equally controversial is George Soros. Between 2018 and 2022, the billionaire financier directed $153,488,100 to four Arabella groups through two of his 501(c)(3) and one 501(c)(4) nonprofits.61 Soros-linked contributions were important in state supreme court elections. Soros funds were especially prominent in county and city prosecutor races across the country.

https://capitalresearch.org/article/donors-to-the-arabella-advisors-network/ https://capitalresearch.org/article/who-are-arabellas-big-dollar-donors/ 59 https://americansforpublictrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/APT-Wyss-Report.pdf 60 https://americansforpublictrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/APT_1630_Ballot_Spending_Report_FINAL.pdf 61 https://capitalresearch.org/article/donors-to-the-arabella-advisors-network/ 57

District Attorneys and Reform

District Attorneys and Reform Soros’s organizations have exerted their greatest influence in full-service support for candidates in district attorney elections.62 Soros and other progressive funders not only spend significant money to elect district attorneys (DAs) but also link prospective and sitting reform prosecutors with networking and candidate training opportunities. A direct route to criminal justice reform lies in electing progressive prosecutors who, once in office, fail to prosecute criminal defendants or instead substitute “restorative justice” for jail time. The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, a charitable foundation established to defend police, places the number of Soros backed or aligned candidates at 75 in 2022.63 This number dropped to 70 in 2024, when some Soros backed/aligned candidates lost elections or declined to run for reelection.64 District attorneys count as Soros-aligned if they meet at least two of three criteria: funding from one of Soros-affiliated non-profit foundations or a Soros funded political action committee, attending a Soros-funded criminal reform conference, or signing a Soros-backed amicus brief. Attracting the most attention among Soros-backed district attorneys are those serving big cities where crime rates exploded while the prosecutors pushed criminal justice reform. Going back to the first generation (2014-2016), they include Alvin Bragg (New York City), Larry Krasner (Philadelphia), Kim Foxx (Chicago) and George Gascón (Los Angeles). Conservative critics charge that these cities saw skyrocketing crime because of their “soft-on-crime policies.” 65 While Krasner and Bragg have weathered controversies and won reelection, Foxx and Gascón are out of office. Cook County voters replaced Foxx, who chose not to run for a third term, with Eileen O’Neill Burke. She ran without the Democratic Party endorsement with a promise to get tougher on crime while retaining some social programs.66 Gascón, who survived two recall attempts, lost his job as DA in 2024 to a former federal prosecutor who vowed to fight the disorder plaguing the city without mass incarceration.67

We use “district attorney,” the title used in most states, as the general term to describe the official entrusted with prosecuting crimes at the county or district level. The only exception in our usage is in reference to specific officials in states that use different titles, such as state’s attorney. 63 https://www.policedefense.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Justice_For_Sale_LELDF_report.pdf 64 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/soros-das-suffer-12-big-defeats-billionaires-agenda-faces-uncertain-future 65 https://www.policedefense.org/sorosmap/ 66 https://www.chicagomag.com/chicago-magazine/february-2025/cook-countys-new-no-nonsense-top-prosecutor/ 67 https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/nathan-hochman-wins-los-angeles-county-district-attorney-race-georgegascon/3552627/ 62

Though reform prosecutors in the nation’s biggest cities get noticed in the national media, the network of progressive prosecutors also spans smaller cities and counties in every corner of America while attracting much less attention. We now turn to how they won their elections, the controversies that followed reform in action, and the progressive machine’s work in helping the prosecutors navigate storms of negative publicity.

Electing Reform Prosecutors Outside of the biggest cities, reform DA candidates’ campaigns tend to follow a pattern. First, there is the identification of an opportunity. That might be a long-serving incumbent who is stepping down or a vulnerable one who has recently attracted negative press for an incident such as a botched prosecution. Whether Soros-sponsored nonprofits have a systematic program to identify targets is unclear, although in the early round of races in 2015-2016, a study showing that most district attorneys ran unopposed and a majority were white males was reportedly helpful. It inspired The Color of Change to launch a research project to identify promising races.68 An online racial justice organization that also contributed to DA campaigns, Color of Change counts George Soros as a large and regular donor.69 How Soros nonprofits identify DA candidates to back is murky. Early reports mention Emerge America, a 527 that trains and supports women interested in running for office, as active in the search.70 Whitney Tymas, treasurer of the national Safety and Justice PAC that begat state and city Safety and Justice PACs to finance DA campaigns, also appeared to be involved in vetting candidates.71 Others, however, expressed surprise when campaign ads suddenly appeared attacking their opponents. However they were chosen, the candidates that gained the Soros network’s support typically had experience in criminal justice reform movements, not traditional prosecution. Before he became Hinds County (Jackson), Mississippi District Attorney in 2020, Jody Owens was Chief Policy Counsel and Managing Attorney at the Mississippi Office of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Orange County (Orlando), Florida DA Monique Worrell, was a legal officer for REFORM Alliance. Founded in 2019, by “a world-class group of philanthropists and activists,” it advocates for limits on parole and probation and “restorative justice.” 72 Larry Krasner was a public defender and defense attorney specializing in civil rights before becoming Philadelphia County (Philadelphia), Pennsylvania’s DA.73 The less-prominent David Clegg, who narrowly won his Ulster County

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/george-soros-criminal-justice-reform-227519 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/colorofchange-org/C00428557/donors/2022 70 https://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/george-soros-criminal-justice-reform-227519 71 https://www.cityandstatepa.com/politics/2017/04/soros-super-pac-make-huge-ad-buy-philly-da-candidatekrasner/365068/ 72 https://reformalliance.com/about/# 73 https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/politics/city/Longtime-civil-rights-attorney-Larry-Krasner-wants-to-reformDAs-office.html 68 69

(Kingston), New York DA position in 2019, had a very similar resume.74 Jackie Sartoris, the Cumberland County (Portland) Maine DA, had previous experience as a prosecutor. But it was in the Treatment Courts in Kennebec County, a division that aimed to move people away from the criminal justice system to treatment if their contact with the system stemmed from substance abuse issues.75 While there are prominent examples of former prosecutors receiving support, such as Alvin Bragg, the Soros network appears to have a clear preference for candidates with a background outside of – or better, in opposition to – the existing criminal justice system. Most of those chosen turned out to be reliable progressives. Still, there have been misses. Kim Ogg was among the first generation of Soros-backed prosecutors, elected as Harris County (Houston), Texas DA in 2016. But she backtracked on such issues as cashless bail, citing the high rate of no-shows for hearings.76 She lost her bid for a third term to a challenger backed by Soros PACs.77 Another member of the class of 2016, Darius Pattillo of Henry County (McDonough), Georgia, received a relatively modest Soros investment. Aside from creating a diversion program for first-time nonviolent offenders, he strayed far enough from progressive orthodoxy to seek the death penalty in a quadruple murder case. 78 The investments are often massive. From 2014 through 2024, the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund estimates Soros PAC funding at least $50 million, a sum that excludes other related progressive sources.79 The independent spending supplied by Safety and Justice PACs and related groups overwhelm the resources of the candidates. In 2016, Aramis Ayala was a relative unknown in Florida’s Ninth Circuit District. She and others took on a vulnerable incumbent in the Democratic primary, which would be the only race that mattered, with Ayala running in the reform lane. The Florida Safety and Justice PAC blanketed the district with approximately $1 million in ads attacking the incumbent. The incumbent raised $112,445.80 In Cumberland County, Maine, the Maine Justice and Public Safety PAC blew by both candidates combined. It spent nearly $350,000, mostly on misleading video ads and flyers.81 Some of the ads boiled down a very complicated set of circumstances that spanned the tenure of two district attorneys to something simple and misleading: the incumbent prosecuted a victim of sex trafficking. A representative of a victim’s advocate group commented that the ads “completely contradicts what we worked on so hard.” 82

https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individuals/david-clegg/ https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/news/politics/cumberland-county-district-attorney-to-face-primarychallenger/97-1cd1a665-00ad-49c4-9187-fb0e8ebe0066 76 https://www.texasobserver.org/ogg-da-houston-primary-ousted/ 77 https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/election/2024/article/harris-county-da-campaign-finance-18667322.php 78 https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/henry-county/da-seeks-death-penalty-for-suspects-in-henry-county-quadruplemurder/511625295/ 79 https://www.policedefense.org/sorosmap/ 80 https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2016/08/31/aramis-ayala-upsets-jeff-ashton-for-state-attorney/ 81 https://mainecampaignfinance.com/index.html#/exploreCommitteeDetail/438206 82 https://wgme.com/news/local/district-attorney-race-draws-in-350k-from-soros-backed-pac 74

In traditionally placid Arlington County, Virginia, Parisa Dehghani-Tafti challenged the moderate Democrat incumbent in 2019. The campaign raised nearly $1 million, about four times what was typical for a DA race. $600,000 came from a Soros PAC, which ran ads that could leave the impression that the county was a racially discriminatory police state.83 The striking infusions of dark money spending naturally became an issue. Recipients had an easy answer: an independent group, without coordination with their campaigns, produced the digital, radio, and television ads. They had no control over the tone or content. Besides, as Monique Worrell put it while running to replace Ayala in Florida’s Ninth Circuit, criticizing such funding sources was an “anti-Semitic Soros trope.”84 The injection of sudden cash is hard to beat, but it happens. In 2023, Matt Dugan, a career public defender, took on Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) Pennsylvania DA Stephen A. Zappala Jr., the incumbent who had held office since the late 1990s. Backed by more than $700,000 independent expenditures from the Soros-funded Pennsylvania Justice and Public Safety PAC, Dugan prevailed by 10 points.85 In a county where Democrats are a 2-1 majority, a low-turnout primary win is usually the end of the story. But Republicans planned ahead. Running a write-in campaign for Zappala, a lifelong Democrat, Republicans gained him enough votes to put him on the general election ballot. A former governor and the county Republican Party chair spearheaded the effort, out of concern about the progressive wing of the Pittsburgh Democratic Party and the experience of Philadelphia under Krasner.86 The general election was remarkably expensive. Dugan raised only $153,000, but enjoyed an additional $1.9 million spent by the Pennsylvania Justice and Public Safety PAC on advertising, mailings, and polling.87 Zappala collected $1.1 million. Most of that came from local sources including labor unions, although two Republican PACs chipped in $125,000 in late October.88 Both sides traded negative ads. Zappala won by 3 points, with the support of moderate Democrats and Republicans.89 Whether his experience is a blueprint or a one-off is uncertain.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/06/10/soros-prosecutor-arlington-county-227101/ https://floridapolitics.com/archives/349392-george-soros-interest-in-orlandos-state-attorney-race-opens-crossfire/ 85 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/george-soros-backed-pittsburgh-district-attorney-candidate-wins-democratic-primary 86 https://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-local/2023/08/18/district-attorney-race-zappala-dugan-electionrepublican-democrat-forward/stories/202308180104 87 https://www.wesa.fm/wesa-voter-guide/2023/allegheny-county-district-attorney-dugan-zappala 88 https://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-local/2023/10/27/allegheny-county-da-race-fundraising-matt-duganstephen-zappala-george-soros/stories/202310270102 89 https://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-local/2023/11/09/allegheny-county-election-results-stephen-zappala/ stories/202311090113 83

Reform in Action Outside of the largest cities and spectacular trials, DAs are rarely major newsmakers. But many reform prosecutors became the exceptions as they pressed forward their ideological agendas.90 Commitments to principles such as opposition to the death penalty, diversion programs rather than prison, cashless bail, the imperative to investigate possible police misconduct, and non-prosecution of crimes deemed unworthy generated controversy, especially in the midst of rampant crime. The connection between spiking murder and general crime rates and progressive prosecution policies is uncertain. If prosecution were the only variable – if social, economic, demographic, and cultural conditions and police work, for example had no impact – we would know how to end crime. A number of studies have shown little to no relationship between rates of serious crimes and the presence of reform prosecutors. The murder rate in general rose in the aftermath of the Covid pandemic and the riots that followed the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. While a number of Soros-backed prosecutors were removed from office, murder rates dropped across the board, no matter the prosecutors’ policies, in 2024-2025.91 On the other hand, a pair of economists found a clever work-around for the problem of inconsistent data in crime reports. Analyzing community all-cause mortality, they found that tough-on-crime prosecutors, especially Republicans elected in close contests, produced lower mortality rates. Tracking data from 2010-2019, they found a 6.6 percent drop in mortality among young men, driven by a large reduction in gun homicides.92 And some studies provide evidence that cities with progressive prosecutors see an increase in property crime, even if the impact on violent crime is small.93 Whatever the impact of reform policies, public perception – especially the outrage of victims and their families – differs from reassuring academic studies, especially when perpetrators with long records of violent crime nonetheless walked free to carry out more mayhem. Examples of permissive sentencing by the progressive prosecutors are extensive. For example, in 2026, Stephanie Miller, a 41-year-old mother, was stabbed to death in Northern Virginia. An illegal alien from Sierra Leone, Abdul Jalloh, was charged with the murder. No stranger to the justice system, Jalloh had more than 40 previous arrests for violent crimes including sexual assault.94 Under Soros-funded Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano, those violations called for little to no time, perhaps because they fell within the list of crimes he deemed unworthy of prosecution.95

Exceptions included those who downplayed reform, such as Brian Middleton of Fort Bend County, Texas. https://cleverjourneys.com/2022/04/25/list-of-george-soros-owned-district-attorneys/ 91 https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/myths-and-realities-prosecutors-and-criminal-justice-reform 92 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6304441 93 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9133.12666; https://tylerjamesludwig.com/documents/FischerLudwig_DAs.pdf 94 https://redstate.com/terichristoph/2026/03/02/how-to-get-away-with-murder-in-virginia-n2199769 95 https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/meet-steve-descano-the-rogue-prosecutor-whose-policiesare-wreaking 90

Monique Worrell, who benefited from the $1.5 million spent by Soros-linked Our Voices, Our Votes in 2020, had a rocky first term, punctuated by her suspension by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis for her failure to follow state law.96 She won reelection but faced fresh criticism for her policies, highlighted by one 2026 murder case. In 2021, Ahmad Jihad Bojeh admitted to attempted first-degree murder with a firearm, aggravated battery and two counts of criminal mischief in 2021. Worrell agreed to bypass a jury trial and Bojeh was found not guilty by reason of insanity. After a bit more than a year in jail and an agreement (which he broke) that he would continue treatment rather than enter a mental hospital, Bojeh was free.97 In 2026, Bojeh was charged with the murder of three elderly tourists who were staying at a short-term rental next to Bojeh’s home. Worrell blamed the increased cost of outpatient treatment for Bojeh’s violence. “Bad things happen, and that’s what we’re dealing with,” she said, adding that out of respect for the dead, the time was not right for political discussions.98

Death Penalty Opposition to the death penalty is among Soros’ core commitments and non-negotiable for some of the progressive prosecutors his groups supported. In addition to moral considerations, there are solid, pragmatic reasons not to pursue it, including the time and expense involved in prosecutions and extra appeals. Still, taking it off the table in states that allow it does remove one tool from prosecutors in negotiating pleas. Some DAs in the Soros network made it clear that they oppose the death penalty in all cases. Fifty-six signed a Fair and Just Prosecutions letter denouncing the death penalty as racist, ineffective as a deterrent, and arbitrary.99 Some prosecutors had cases removed from their offices because of their policies. In 2016, Aramis Ayala was elected in Florida’s Ninth Judicial Circuit with Soros backing. Campaigning on the need to correct racial injustices in the legal system, she said that because of the “disparate treatment” received by “black and brown people” in the legal system, “we have to have things in place to do something different.”100

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2020/08/16/group-with-ties-to-billionaire-george-soros-spends-15-million-on-lastminute-ads-in-orange-osceola-state-attorney-race/ Our Voices, Our Vote’s burst of spending amounted to more than twice as much as all of the other candidates combined. 97 https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/who-is-ahmad-bojeh-man-murder-suspect-accused-killing-three-tourists-kissimmee 98 https://thepostmillennial.com/florida-prosecutor-defends-2021-release-of-ahmad-jihad-bojeh-on-insanity-plea-now-hescharged-with-killing-3-tourists?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email 99 https://fairandjustprosecution.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/FJP-Death-Penalty-Joint-Statement-2022.pdf 100 https://www.cfpublic.org/2016-11-03/central-florida-poised-to-deliver-the-states-first-black-prosecutor-aramis-ayala 96

“Different” included her refusal to seek the death penalty no matter the crime. Republican Governor Rick Scott withdrew potential death penalty cases from her office because her stance hindered prosecutions. The case that brought the dispute to a head involved Markeith Loyd, who was wanted for the murder of his pregnant girlfriend. Police officer Debra Clayton spotted Loyd at a Walmart store, and when she approached, he shot her repeatedly. Numerous witnesses described Loyd standing over Clayton while he continued shooting.101 Governor Ron DeSantis was forced to suspend Ayala again when he replaced Scott. The reason here was another especially egregious case: two men dismembered a woman and scattered her remains over two properties.102

The Failure to Prosecute and Racial Justice Many progressive DAs took office without significant – or any – experience as prosecutors or as administrators leading teams of lawyers and staff. Indeed, one, Florida’s Monique Worrell, explained in a debate that she had never sought to become a prosecutor before because she is “not ideologically aligned with the current system of prosecution.” 103 Progressives did, however, make clear their devotion to racial justice, that is, reversing the pattern that produces too many blacks and Hispanics stopped by police, arrested, and charged while whites go free. It is impossible to know whether inexperience or a zeal for righting purported racial wrongs explains the trail of progressive DAs’ botched cases and failures to prosecute or if it is a bit of both. But the record is unmistakable. Over the course of a bit over six years in office, Nueces County (Corpus Christi), Texas DA Mark Gonzalez had amassed a sizable record of non-prosecution, fumbled cases, and failures to follow through. One of those failures ended in tragedy. A man whom the Community Supervision and Correction Department repeatedly reported over eight months for parole violations shot and killed two women.104 The DA’s office dismissed nearly 17,000 misdemeanor and felony cases between 2016 and 2019. Even offenders were surprised. Some discovered they were free to leave while still in diversion treatment programs or on probation.105 Gonzalez dismissed a murder

https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/orlando-cop-killer-markeith-loyds-conviction-upheld/ https://www.flcourier.com/news/florida/desantis-removes-ayala-from-murder-case/article_60a5f6c7-128c-5881-950b6f4b9807aa65.html 103 https://floridapolitics.com/archives/351625-deb-barra-proposes-corruption-unit-in-orlandos-state-attorney-office/ 104 https://www.kristv.com/news/6-investigates/6-investigates-examines-cases-in-which-nueces-county-da-doesnt-pursuecharges The parole violations included aggravated robbery, which the DA’s office did not act on. 105 https://www.kristv.com/news/6-investigates/nueces-county-dismissals-impacting-programs-designed-to-rehabilitate-offenders 101

102

charge and replaced it with unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon.106 A botched murder trial, in which an assistant DA shared records with the victim’s family before trial, inspired a conservative activist to successfully launch a petition to force Gonzalez to be tried and removed from office. Before the case went to trial, Gonzalez resigned.107 Fairfax County, Virginia’s Steve Descano’s history of failed prosecutions as Commonwealth Attorney includes a man who got probation and time served in a plea deal for the sexual assault of an eleven-year-old. The deal was the result of Descano’s office failing to meet the judge’s discovery deadline.108 Another Virginia prosecutor had a similar problem with deadlines. Judges dismissed two serious cases, including a murder, because Commonwealth Attorney Stephanie Morales’ office missed deadlines and failed to provide information on discovery.109 One progressive prosecutor made her motivations clear. Hennepin County (Minneapolis), Minnesota DA Mary Moriarty wrote a directive that required prosecutors to consider the race of the accused in making plea deals. For Moriarty, such a policy, as unconstitutional as it likely is, would reduce racial disparities in the justice system.110 Moriarty’s general policy of exercising her judgment about which rapists, killers, and other violent criminals were a danger to the community outraged victims and their families, and legal staff resigned in disgust. Moriarty was unmoved. “I think it takes a lot of courage actually to act upon what you say you’re going to do,” she said. “I knew we would get a lot of pushback.” Congratulating herself, she continued, “But if you’re truly going to make change, if you truly are about your values, and you want to have integrity, and you believe in research and look at the data, these are the right decisions and I stand by them.”111 Like other progressives, Moriarty believed diversion programs are more appropriate than jail time for some offenders. She found a new use for the program. When federal DOGE activity associated with Elon Musk was at its peak, along with vandalism and arson directed at Musk’s Tesla products, an attorney working in Moriarty’s office was caught on tape vandalizing Teslas. The damage to six cars totaled $21,000. Rather than charging him as an adult who knowingly committed felony vandalism, Moriarty moved him to a diversion program designed for teenaged pranksters.112 Out of inexperience or an ideological commitment to avoiding prosecution, Monique Worrell’s Florida jurisdiction had the lowest prison admission rates for robbery with a weapon, armed burglary, and weapons possession compared to other Florida counties.113 She also bypassed state mandatory minimum sentences and reduced charges wherever possible. The list of

https://www.kristv.com/nueces-county-dismisses-nearly-three-in-four-criminal-cases-over-three-years https://www.kristv.com/news/6-investigates/mark-gonzalez-will-step-down-as-nueces-county-district-attorney 108 https://www.fox5dc.com/news/mom-sues-fairfax-commonwealths-attorney-after-child-sex-crimes-plea-deal 109 https://www.pilotonline.com/2023/09/20/second-major-portsmouth-criminal-case-in-a-month-thrown-out-due-toprosecutors-mistakes/ 110 https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/courts-news/prosecutors-race-plea-deals-new-policy-hennepin-county-attorneymary-moriarty/89-5ec5744c-84cc-45fa-930f-11b1f2bf0776 111 https://www.startribune.com/hennepin-county-attorney-mary-moriarty-families-victims-plea-deals/600308775 112 https://www.startribune.com/opinion-a-21000-crime-a-diversion-deal-and-a-justice-system-off-the-rails/601336611 113 https://www.flgov.com/eog/sites/default/files/executive-orders/2024/EO-23-160.pdf 106 107

outrageous cases is long, but includes, for example, dropping charges against a juvenile arrested for first-degree premeditated murder and attempted first-degree murder in June 2021. His arrest record also included burglary, resisting an officer, assault with a firearm and aggravated assault.114 A number of Soros-supported prosecutors argue that the still-underdeveloped brains of young people make them less-than-responsible for criminal behavior. The Contra Costa County (Martinez), California DA, for example, proposed sending virtually all offenders between the ages of 18 and 21 into restorative justice programs. Lacking the mental maturity to understand their actions, those committing anything short of murder or rape – crimes including child molestation, human sex trafficking, burglary, organized retail theft, robbery, assault, arson, sexual assault, and car theft and carjacking – would be eligible.115 In fairness, the vast majority of cases before DA offices never go to trial. About two-thirds of felony prosecutions, for example, wind up in plea deals according to a Bureau of Justice Statistics analysis.116 Given limited prosecutorial resources, plea deals make sense as part of an effort to balance justice and community safety. The differences between reform and traditional prosecutors are clearer in the reformers’ more aggressive use of dismissals and diversion programs. Again, all prosecutors dismiss cases for the lack of evidence among other reasons and exercise judgment on diversion for drug crimes. For example, dismissals in jurisdictions with progressive DAs run about 8 percent higher than traditional ones, with some reformers refusing to prosecute entire classes of crime.117

Corruption A number of Soros prosecutors created legal difficulties for themselves through their behavior in office. Corruption is a potential career-ender, especially for those entrusted with enforcing the law. Jody Owens, for example, whose previous legal experience was with the Southern Poverty Law Center, won election as DA in Hinds County (Jackson), Mississippi after a half million-dollar donation from the Mississippi Safety and Justice PAC.118 In January 2026, the Department of Justice charged Owens with eight counts of bribery and other charges. Owens claimed he was entrapped after being fed alcohol, but in late June 2026 he resigned his position after pleading guilty in the federal bribery case.119

https://dailycaller.com/2023/08/09/rundown-prosecutor-monique-worrell-ron-desantis/ https://contracosta.news/2023/10/23/contra-costa-district-attorneys-secret-plan-not-to-prosecute/ 116 https://bjs.ojp.gov/document/psc20.pdf 117 https://tylerjamesludwig.com/documents/FischerLudwig_DAs.pdf 118 https://magnoliatribune.com/2024/11/11/owens-arc-from-splc-to-soros-to-fbi-yacht/ 119 https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/local/2024/11/07/mississippi-bribery-case-hinds-county-district-attorneyjody-owens-indicted-on-federal-charges/75599987007/ 114 115

Former city of St. Louis, Missouri DA Kim Gardner, among the first generation of Soros prosecutors, not only filed 50 percent fewer cases than her predecessor, but was investigated for mismanagement and misuse of funds. An examination found that Gardner misspent nearly $60,000 of a circuit attorney contingency fund on items like personal legal expenses, specifically defending herself in a disciplinary hearing about her prosecution of the former governor that was dropped.120 In addition, the state auditor found Gardner spent office funds on her Sam’s Club membership and disc jockey services. She also disappeared for weeks while she took graduate nursing classes. Her office, according to a judge, was a “rudderless ship of chaos.” She resigned in 2023.121 Cumberland County (Portland), Maine provides a tale of the benefits of being well-connected. Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Resource Manager Stephen Walker, the ex-husband of the state Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Commissioner was caught using his office computer to buy drugs using cryptocurrency. Rather than facing investigation or prosecution, he was made director of the Brunswick-Topsham Land Trust. It no doubt helped that Walker had since married Cumberland County DA Jacqueline Sartoris. He kept that job until a local conservative news service reported on the case.122

Prosecuting the Police The corollary to the progressive article of faith that America wrongly and needlessly prosecutes too many people, especially people of color, is that out-of-control police are not held accountable for abusing their power. Many of them attempt to correct the imbalance by zealously going after the police. For sheer tenacity, Minnesota’s Mary Moriarty stands out. In 2024, state trooper Ryan Londregan killed a man who was evading an active warrant for violating a protection order in a traffic stop. Moriarty promised to hold police accountable in her campaign, and she tried to make that happen in this case, charging the trooper with second-degree unintentional murder, and a count each of first-degree assault and second-degree manslaughter. She persisted despite the analysis of body and dash camera video by her own use-of-force expert that cleared Londregan. The assistant prosecutor handling the case resigned. Progressive Governor Tim Walz appeared ready to reroute the case.123

https://www.kcur.org/news/2022-04-11/attorney-who-handled-2018-prosecution-of-gov-eric-greitens-admits-to-rule-violations https://www.stlpr.org/government-politics-issues/2025-01-07/missouri-audit-st-louis-prosecutor-kim-gardner-problems 122 https://robinsonreport.substack.com/p/ex-husband-of-ifw-chief-resigns-land 123 https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/tim-walz-ryan-londregan-ricky-cobb-case-hennepin-county-attorneymary-moriarty/ 120 121

Moriarty eventually dropped the case, but only after Steptoe LLC, a Washington, D.C. law firm she hired to take up the case persuaded her to do so. Taxpayers were on the hook for the $578,000 they charged for telling her what everyone else already said.124 In Travis County (Austin), Texas, prosecutions of police stemming from the George Floyd protests are still unresolved. In 2020, Austin experienced days of unrest. Along with looting, protesters threw frozen water bottles, rocks, and fireworks at police and focused on one station house. Police responded by arresting protesters and firing non-lethal beanbag projectiles to break up the riot. The city, like others across the U.S., paid settlements to protesters injured in the melee. Travis County DA Jose Garza had campaigned on police accountability, and to follow through, charged 19 police officers with assault and use of excessive force, including firing beanbag rounds.125 Two years later, Garza’s office dismissed charges against 17 officers.126 Three officers still have felony charges pending, as motions to dismiss citing prosecutorial misconduct (withholding evidence about defective beanbags), an investigation of Garza, and other delays have dragged on.127 Police-prosecutor relations in cities with progressive DAs are often fraught. To remove any appearance of a conflict of interest and potentially make prosecutions of police misconduct easier, a group of California DAs argued that the state bar and the American Bar Association should adopt a rule banning police union endorsements and contributions to DA campaigns.128 While a ban failed as it likely violated campaign finance law, individual progressive prosecutors asserted their independence from the police.129 A nationwide group of forty progressive DAs and attorneys general also called for rejecting police support.130 On the other side, police unions have also been active in opposing “criminal-first” prosecutors, whom they say endanger the public.131 Police unions have backed recall efforts against prosecutors such as Garza and San Francisco, California’s Chesa Boudin (ultimately successful). They have called on DAs to resign in the midst of violent attacks directed at police.132 While the tensions between progressive prosecutors and the police might have peaked in the early 2020s, friction remains. That is, of course, not ideal, since the two sides must work together to provide public safety.

https://www.startribune.com/special-counsel-hired-by-moriarty-bills-578k-for-work-in-londregan-case-firm-issuesreport/600386582 125 https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/travis-county-da-jos-garza-151615687.html 126 https://www.kvue.com/article/news/police/cases-dropped-austin-police-reaction-2020-protest/269-f0fa220c-e2da-4df588d4-84c8981dd500 127 https://www.fox7austin.com/news/travis-county-da-criminal-allegations-dismissed 128 https://www.courthousenews.com/das-demand-ban-on-political-donations-endorsements-by-police-to-prosecutors/ 129 https://www.calbar.ca.gov/sites/default/files/agenda/agendaitem1000026271.pdf 130 https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Bexar-County-District-Attorney-joins-national-15510569.php 131 https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/02/08/criminal-justice-police-progressive-prosecutors-battle-overreform/4660796002/ 132 https://www.ksat.com/news/ksat-investigates/2023/08/31/after-rash-of-violence-against-sapd-officers-unionpresident-calls-on-da-gonzales-to-resign/; https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/midwest/chicagos-topprosecutor-kim-foxx-defends-policy-amid-wave-of-violence/ 124

Extending Reform Prosecution

Is Reform Prosecution Enough? For true believers of Critical Race Theory, the record of reform prosecutors is entirely inadequate. A blistering Harvard Law Review Note argued that diversion programs do nothing more than enmesh offenders further in the system, sometimes paying fees for privilege. Staff undercut reforms, and real accountability for police misconduct has yet to happen. Electing progressive prosecutors is like cutting away the noticeable mold from a piece of bread and eating it in the irrational hope that the visible part is the entire extent of the mold. Reform prosecution can never change a fundamentally corrupt and racist system.133

Training, Instruction, and Management for Sitting Prosecutors Both parties have associations for state attorneys general that meet regularly and sometimes act together. Those are long-standing organizations understood to be partisan. Conservatives have nothing like the support provided to progressive prosecutors. They can tap into public relations and staffing help and even advice on how to handle cases. That is in addition to the availability of ongoing training on reform issues. New progressive DAs without much prosecutorial or administrative experience can have confidence that there is a dark money infrastructure that has their backs. The extent of the involvement of dark money groups with progressive DAs first emerged through a news tip received by a San Antonio, Texas, radio station. They followed up with a records request that allowed them to investigate the connections between The Wren Collective and Bexar County (San Antonio), Texas DA Joe Gonzales’s office.

133

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/748-770_Online.pdf

The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund in its extensive 2025 report on The Wren Collective, “Outsourcing Justice” notes these features that characterize this organization: • Operates as a privately held company • Launched in 2020 • Succeeds former public defender Jessica Brand’s prior consultancy, The Justice Collaborative • Obscures funding sources through a former pro-Soviet film charity • Serves as campaign and PAC consultant for progressive prosecutors’ elections • Provides consulting in at least 40 prosecutor offices for prosecutorial policies, media and public relations, and legal strategies • Relies on funding from foundations supported by George Soros, Cari Tuna, John Arnold, and Stacy Schusterman Gonzales was in touch with Wren representatives days after he took office, and remained in frequent contact thereafter. He or his assistant discussed policy, such as bail reform, and topics to bring up in county meetings. Jessica Brand, the co-founder of Wren, also weighed in on how to handle a police-involved shooting. Wren also wrote op-eds and talking points to help with messaging.134 Wren, founded by activist and public defender Jessica Brand, began as an LLC in 2021 but now has grown with its nonprofit business dedicated to “replacing ineffective and often disingenuous approaches to crime.”135 It is supported by nonprofits that seek to transform the justice system such as Open Philanthropy, Real Justice PAC, and Grassroots Law Project, and in some cases, taxpayer dollars. The Media Research Center (MRC), a conservative think tank, followed up on what the San Antonio radio station uncovered. Gonzales was not alone in getting help. Its report details the consistent communication that shapes the policies of Soros-backed prosecutors in office. Drawing on nearly 8,000 pages of internal documents obtained through public records requests, the MRC described the involvement of Wren and Fair and Just Prosecution (FJP), the financial angel of many progressive DAs, in great and small decisions.136

https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2024/01/30/criminal-justice-reform-group-wields-significant-influence-on-da-joegonzales-text-records-show/ 135 https://wrencollective.org/who-we-are/ 136 https://cdn.mrc.org/static/pdfuploads/Soros+Report_FINAL_PAGES.pdf-1723215421233.pdf 134

They include the following: • FJP watches over its prosecutors through frequent meetings – public facing, private in-person, and private virtual. The Vera Institute, funded by the Open Society Foundation and the Prosecutors Alliance of California, called its own meeting to discuss policy ideas.137 The Prosecutors Alliance, a project of the Tides Center, offers its own trainings and conferences, including an annual police misconduct conference.138 The project is also building its student chapters in California law schools. • FJP also assists in office operations. It assists with staffing, which is useful since staff turnover is a common issue with reform prosecutors. This help also primes a talent pipeline by placing law students and recent graduates in the network in their first jobs.139 • FJP is a public relations outfit, too. Its members get training on how to work with the media, while also instructing them on how to craft and place op-eds and press releases. Polling provided free to reform prosecutors guides them in how best to frame otherwise unpopular ideas. The Wren Collective cooperates with the FJP to provide PR materials – op-eds, press releases, and talking points – to at least 40 progressive prosecutors. In the most shocking move, its representatives have even advised prosecutors about whether or not to bring charges in cases as well as specific state-tailored policy proposals.140 The Wren Collective claims that it does not charge prosecutorial officers for its service.141 However, this claim is murky. For example, taxpayer funds appear to have been provided to The Wren Collective for its work on behalf of the Texas progressive prosecutor. Similarly, Hennepin County in Minneapolis approved $225,000 in fees for Wren’s work on behalf of its controversial DA, Mary Moriarty.142 The Soros network also provides a potential landing spot for DAs who have left office. Florida’s Aramis Ayala was facing headwinds in running for reelection. Instead, citing her opposition to the death penalty that ran so deep she could not countenance even having homicides removed from her office, she considered other political opportunities. She thought about a run for a House seat, or perhaps the U.S. Senate.143 Instead she lost badly in the race for attorney general. FJP came through. She became Executive Director in 2025. “Now more than ever, prosecutors are on the front lines in the fight for justice,” she said. “FJP is here to back them up with the resources, experts, and assistance they need to create real, community-driven change.” 144

https://cdn.mrc.org/static/pdfuploads/Soros+Report_FINAL_PAGES.pdf-1723215421233.pdf. p. 4. https://prosecutorsalliance.org/police-misconduct-conference/ 139 https://cdn.mrc.org/static/pdfuploads/Soros+Report_FINAL_PAGES.pdf-1723215421233.pdf, p. 17. 140 https://www.city-journal.org/article/progressive-prosecutors-wren-consulting-jessica-brand-police-reform-donors 141 https://freebeacon.com/democrats/meet-the-firm-bankrolled-by-left-wing-donors-quietly-embedding-itself-withprogressive-prosecutors/ 142 https://www.policedefense.org/outsourcing-justice/, p. 43. 143 https://www.wesh.com/article/aramis-ayala-interview/39331459 144 https://davisvanguard.org/2025/04/fair-just-prosecution-appoints-aramis-ayala/ 137

138

The connections among the funders interested in criminal justice reform through electing progressive prosecutors ran deep. The same deep pockets, often enough trust-funders, contributed to multiple outlets backing progressives. As former progressive fundraiser Evan Barker describes it, Real Justice PAC and well-connected individuals such as Chloe Cockburn, linked left-leaning billionaires such as the Facebook co-founder to the Soros network and from there to candidates who followed the reform prosecutor script. The groups worked in coordination on recruiting and supporting candidates. Populating the groups were people “from extremely privileged backgrounds” untouched by the policies they promoted.146

145

Evan Barker, Nothing Left: Confessions of a Democratic Operative (New York: Threshold Editions, 2026), 146.

Media

Media It is not news that the news business is in financial trouble. Less obvious is the involvement of Soros-backed and other left-wing funds in filling the gap. There are now more dark money funded news sites than there are traditional local newspapers left in the United States.146 The National Trust for Local News is one example. Financed by the progressive sources such as Soros’s Open Society Foundation as well as Pierre Omidyar’s Democracy Fund, the Knight Foundation, the Tides Foundation, and Klarman Family Foundation, it purchased local newspapers in Colorado, Georgia, and Maine. According to the international news outfit Semafor, Hansjorg Wyss, tied to the Arabella network, also donated.147 All but one of the six daily newspapers and 17 weeklies are owned by the Maine Trust for Local News, a branch of the National Trust for Local News.148 As the handover of the newspapers in Maine took shape, it was not clear which of the general funders of the national organization were involved in the Maine project and how much they gave.149 While the original plan was to retain local voices and respond to local needs, that mission appears to be slipping if layoffs are a reliable sign. Still, it remains the dominant source of original reporting in the state capitol and its biggest city. Semafor highlighted conservative money that sponsors a news outlet related to a Maine think tank, but it consists of a single website, The Maine Wire. More obviously ideological progressive news sites are part of the States Newsroom network. Describing itself as “the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization” dedicated to eliminating “news deserts,” it focuses on state and local issues.150 Through its own staff or through affiliates, it has a presence in 50 states. States Newsroom touts the absence of paywalls, advertising, and corporate support. Its website does not mention that it began as a project of the Hopewell Fund, one of the Arabella affiliates. As a 501(c)(3), it is not required to disclose the sources of its $27,146,634 in contributions in 2024, but its website lists all contributions over $1,000 in a list without amounts.151

https://web.archive.org/web/20240705120501/https://www.axios.com/2024/06/11/partisan-news-websites-dark-money https://www.semafor.com/article/09/17/2023/medias-political-divide-plays-out-in-maine 148 https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/11/business/media/maine-newspapers-nonprofit.html 149 https://www.pressherald.com/2023/09/25/questions-remain-about-who-funded-sale-of-maine-newspapers-to-nonprofit/ 150 https://statesnewsroom.com/about/ 151 https://statesnewsroom.com/support/ 146 147

It is fair to say that the sources are not nonpartisan: the Wyss Foundation, for example, contributed $1.1 million in 2023.152 The Minnesota-based Bush Foundation, which largely supports left-of-center causes, gave the two outlets in that state $150,000 each in 2025.153 Other online sources of progressive local news are the product of the Courier Newsroom. Operating with funds from Arabella’s North Fund, the Wyss Foundation, the Rockefeller fund, and Soros sources, it presents itself as an “independent advocacy news/media network” that is “factual” but also “values-driven.” 154 Values trump facts, as an Arizona Free Enterprise Club investigation of tax-advantaged funds, nonprofits, and unions in politics reports. That would be the obvious takeaway from headlines that implied that a Republican candidate wanted to win a Senate seat as part of a plan to end democracy.155 The economics of the newspaper business has been brutal, as the internet and smartphones obliterated the advertising and subscription revenue that once made it profitable. Even national big-city newspapers like The Washington Post have been drowning in red ink. Ideological news, disguised as objective reporting and funded by dark money sources, appears to be the future of journalism. What is old – the nineteenth century party press—is new again.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/investigations/3242291/billionaire-hansjorg-wyss-ups-givingdemocratic-dark-money-tied-news-network/ 153 https://www.bushfoundation.org/organizations/states-newsroom/; https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/ bush-foundation/ 154 https://couriernewsroom.com/about/ 155 https://azfree.org/blog/2025/12/15/arizonas-liberal-ngo-syndicate-report/, p. 12. 152

Conclusion

Conclusion By the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund’s restrictive count, approximately 20 percent, or 70 million Americans, live in cities and towns with law enforcement dependent on the ideological convictions of Soros-backed prosecutors.156 In the Brennan Center’s accounting, $85 million of the record total $157 million spent on state supreme court elections in the 2023-2024 cycle came from dark money sources.157 Big spending has generated more contested elections, but at a cost. Dark money, or more to the point, the ideological agenda that fuels it, damages trust in the core institutions of the legal system. Can citizens expect that justices funded by ideological interests can impartially weigh the law in cases that involve those interests? Or do citizens more cynically accept that justices are partisans as much as state representatives and expect them to act like politicians? The consequences of reform prosecutors are more direct and tragic. Crime rates, disorder, and chaos have created a trail of innocent victims as repeat offenders return to the streets. Crime rates are difficult to use as they are dependent on variable reporting and national trends. Breaking the iron triangle of nonprofits, foundations, and activists will not be easy, but can be impacted by an aroused public. The first step is voters’ awareness of the forces operating behind these progressive prosecutors who run on platforms calling for social justice. Behind the mantra of criminal justice reform lies a disregard for the victims of crime-often ethnic and racial minorities who these prosecutors are claiming to represent. Voters need to realize that elite networks are funding and advising these “progressive” prosecutors. Reform in law enforcement should not mean the unleashing of criminals in our streets. Real progress is respecting the constitutional rights of those brought before our courts and those sentenced for their crimes. Everyone has a right to legal representation, a speedy trial, and fair sentencing. At the same time, the general public has a right to safe streets, the protection of their children, and a legal system that does not favor the criminal.

156 157

https://www.policedefense.org/sorosmap/ https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/politics-judicial-elections-2023-24

As long as sharp political polarization exists and a campaign finance system that invites dark money contributions, big spending on judicial races will persist. Campaign finance reform is not likely to happen. The coalition that has traditionally crafted proposals – Democrats with a few Republican allies – have no incentive to seriously return to the issue. Despite occasional demands to reverse Citizens United, Democrats benefit far too much from the current system to make reform a major issue. Even smaller reforms will be difficult. IRS rules about approving 501(c)(4) organization applications remain problematic.158 To qualify, a group’s work outside of political activity needs to be “substantial,” but the IRS has not clarified the meaning of “substantial” or “political.” Still, whatever the legal and legislative barriers, political reform occurs with a passionate public. Voters can and should insist that candidates reveal their sources of funding. At the same time, candidates committed to the rule of law, safe streets and reform need to be recruited and funded to win elections. Legislative bodies at the city, state and national levels joined by the Department of Justice, need to investigate and expose these networks of dark money operating to undermine our justice system. Tax law exempting non-profit and charitable foundations provides an instrument for these activist foundations to operate. The Foreign Agents Registration Act requires that individuals and entities who act as agents of foreign principals publicly disclose their relationship, activities, finances, and communications. This act can be employed against non-profit organizations receiving foreign money. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in NRSC v FEC might help. By allowing coordination between the political parties and candidates and lifting restrictions on contributions to the party committees, it levels the playing field with SuperPACs. Whether this decision is too-littletoo-late to strengthen the parties against the narrower interest groups remains to be seen. Dark money in judicial elections represents a Trojan Horse of chaos in our republic. Respect for the rule of law is fundamental to our democratic system. Once faith in our judiciary system is lost, the nation is lost. An energized public demanding better civic and political leadership will find such leaders stepping forward. Now is the time for the public – American citizens – to call for a restoration of order and leaders to step forward to renew and strengthen our institutions. The time to act is now.

158

https://www.bakerlaw.com/insights/courts-revisit-the-rules-for-section-501c4-political-activity-and-exempt-status/