KillBait - News highlights delivered clearly and responsibly—no clickbait, no sensationalism
Report Examines Dark-Money Funding for Conservative Groups That Supported Supreme Court Challenge to Voting Rights Act Protections
Photo: Raw Story - Celebrating 20 Years of Independent Journalism
2026-06-05 14:16   Politics   12

Report Examines Dark-Money Funding for Conservative Groups That Supported Supreme Court Challenge to Voting Rights Act Protections

A new analysis by the progressive watchdog organization True North Research found that seven conservative nonprofit groups involved in the Supreme Court case Louisiana v.Callais received nearly $105 million from donor-advised funds between 2021 and 2024.According to the report, this represented a sevenfold increase compared with the previous three-year period.

The organizations filed amicus briefs supporting legal arguments that questioned or sought to limit interpretations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, a key federal law designed to prevent racial discrimination in voting.

The group receiving the largest amount of donor-advised funding was America First Legal Foundation, which was co-founded by Stephen Miller, Mark Meadows, and Gene Hamilton, all figures associated with Donald Trump's political movement.

Other organizations examined included Judicial Watch, Pacific Legal Foundation, Public Interest Legal Foundation, Landmark Legal Foundation, California Policy Center, and Project on Fair Representation.The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in Louisiana v.Callais that Louisiana's congressional map creating a second Black-majority district constituted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

Critics of the decision, including voting-rights advocates and some legal scholars, argued that the ruling significantly weakened protections previously provided under the Voting Rights Act.

Experts quoted in the article expressed concern that donor-advised funds allow wealthy contributors to support advocacy efforts and influence public policy debates while remaining anonymous.

Michael Beckel of Issue One stated that such funding mechanisms make it difficult for the public to identify who is financing campaigns and legal arguments presented before the nation's highest court.

Several of the organizations named in the report defended their positions, arguing that the ruling promotes equal treatment under the Constitution and limits race-based districting practices.

Full reading at Raw Story - Celebrating 20 Years of Independent Journalism

2224 
Top Trends
Topics
Top visited