In the wake of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination on September 10, 2025, the Trump administration has launched a sweeping campaign targeting left-leaning nonprofits and advocacy groups, prompting widespread alarm across the philanthropic and civil society sectors. The administration’s moves, which include threats to revoke tax-exempt status, open criminal racketeering investigations, and designate certain organizations as terrorist entities, have generated a fierce debate over free speech, government overreach, and the future of nonprofit advocacy in America.
President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller have all vowed to use the full weight of the federal government to crack down on what they claim are networks fomenting political violence. According to The Free Press, President Trump baselessly blamed the “radical left” for Kirk’s murder, declaring an intent to “hunt down organizations that support violence or go after our judges, law enforcement officials, and everyone else who brings order to our country.” Miller echoed these sentiments, promising “an organized strategy to go after left-leaning organizations” that supposedly promote violence.
On the airwaves and in official statements, the administration has sharpened its rhetoric. “With God as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks and make America safe again for the American people,” Miller said during a conversation with Vance, who was guest hosting Kirk’s radio show this week, as reported by The Hill. Vance added, “We’re going to go after the NGO network that foments, facilitates and engages in violence.”
Despite the administration’s aggressive posture, there is no public evidence linking Kirk’s killer to any broader organization or network. Vance, nonetheless, accused “radical left lunatics” of sowing extremism, a claim that has not been substantiated by law enforcement or independent investigations. This lack of clear linkage has only intensified concerns among the more than 100 nonprofit organizations that immediately sensed they could be targeted by the administration’s sweeping approach.
In response, a coalition of nonprofits—including major foundations like the MacArthur Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, and the Ford Foundation—issued a strongly worded open letter on September 17, 2025, condemning all acts of political violence, including Kirk’s killing. The letter, as cited by Bloomberg, stated: “We reject attempts to exploit political violence to mischaracterize our good work or restrict our fundamental freedoms, like freedom of speech and the freedom to give. Attempts to silence speech, criminalize opposing viewpoints, and misrepresent and limit charitable giving undermine our democracy and harm all Americans.”
Attorney and commentator Norm Eisen, head of Democracy Defenders Action, circulated a similar draft open letter among allies. The statement began by condemning Kirk’s murder but warned, “It is un-American and wrong to use this act of violence as a pretext for weaponizing the government to threaten nonprofit and charitable organizations, other perceived adversaries, or any class of people.” The letter further argued that such attacks threaten essential work, including “working with faith communities, caring for vulnerable populations, upholding the Constitution, [and] defending the rule of law.” It urged the government to de-escalate, concluding, “This moment of tragedy does not call for exploiting a horrific act to further deepen our divides and make us less safe. It calls for unity—unity against violence and unity of purpose as Americans.”
The administration’s legal strategy remains murky. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has suggested using federal racketeering laws—RICO statutes originally designed to fight organized crime—to pursue left-wing groups allegedly engaged in coordinated doxing or other forms of harassment. Blanche cited as precedent a protest against President Trump in Washington, D.C., but legal experts and former prosecutors have dismissed the notion as legally unfounded. “There’s no coordinated organization, and to start talking about RICO, where you would have to prove a criminal enterprise... is totally preposterous and is yet another degradation of the Department of Justice,” Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), a former federal prosecutor, told The Hill. “They could come up with some, you know, small nonprofit that supports immigrants, or that opposes domestic violent extremists or white nationalists. And they could issue subpoenas all their documents and records and all this stuff, which would then require them to get a lawyer and require them to spend tens of thousands of dollars just responding to the subpoena,” he added, warning it could “bankrupt them and destroy them.”
Other administration officials have floated additional punitive measures. FBI Director Kash Patel testified before the House Judiciary Committee that the FBI is “following the money of every organization and every person that is violating the federal code,” and will recommend prosecutions to the Department of Justice as appropriate. President Trump, in a Fox News interview, signaled a particular interest in organizations linked to liberal megadonor George Soros, stating, “You know, you hear Soros. I don’t know. We’re going to find out if he’s behind it, but it’s incitement to riot. That’s a criminal act, and people are dying because of it.”
On September 17, 2025, Trump declared antifa a domestic terrorist group, a move that won praise from some on the right but left legal experts and law enforcement officials scratching their heads. As Bloomberg and The Hill noted, antifa is a decentralized movement without a formal structure, and there is no legal framework for designating domestic terror groups. Trump also recommended investigations into those funding antifa, raising fears that the declaration could be used to justify broader crackdowns on left-wing organizations.
The administration’s actions have not gone unchallenged within Republican ranks. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters, “We do not censor and silence disfavored viewpoints.” Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.), a longtime supporter of the nonprofit sector, cautioned that investigations must focus on groups that have actually incited violence, not simply those with left-leaning views. “Left-leaning is not an issue. Obviously, I disagree, but it’s America. They can still exist. Provoking violence, facilitating illegal activity, that’s different,” he said.
Nonetheless, the threat of government action has prompted nonprofits to brace for legal and financial challenges. Rich Besser, president of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, told a Columbia University event that his organization has undertaken “contingency planning” and increased security. “We recognize that we may have to defend ourselves in court and we’re ready to do that,” Besser said, noting the foundation is already supporting more than 30 grantees fighting funding cuts in court.
Critics argue that the administration’s campaign against left-leaning groups is less about law enforcement and more about political retribution. Caitlin Legacki, a former Biden administration official and adviser to Americans Against Government Censorship, observed, “This did not start last week. It has been bubbling for a while. And political actors both inside the government and outside the government saw this as an opportunity to exploit a tragedy to implement this agenda.”
As the administration considers executive orders, racketeering prosecutions, and tax-status revocations, the nation’s civil society sector faces an unprecedented test. With the legal landscape uncertain and political rhetoric at a fever pitch, the coming months will likely determine whether American nonprofits can continue their work free from government intimidation—or whether a new era of political targeting is at hand.
For now, the open letters, legal preparations, and public statements from foundations and lawmakers underscore the high stakes. The battle over the future of nonprofit advocacy, free speech, and the boundaries of government power is far from over—and the outcome will shape American democracy for years to come.
