‘…a form of retribution against those who have funded left-wing groups…’

Newsweek, By Andrew Stanton, September 30, 2025

More than 3,000 nonprofit organizations from across the country have signed onto an open letter first shared with Newsweek rebuking President Donald Trump’s directive targeting groups accused of supporting “organized political violence.”

Why It Matters

The White House last week issued NSPM-7, a missive titled “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” which orders his administration to investigate groups it suspects promote political violence. Critics have raised concerns about whether the directive could be meant to chill the First Amendment’s guaranteed right to free speech as Trump has accused the left of provoking violence.

What NSPM-7 Says

Under the order, the National Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) shall “coordinate and supervise a comprehensive national strategy to investigate, prosecute, and disrupt entities and individuals engaged in acts of political violence and intimidation designed to suppress lawful political activity or obstruct the rule of law.”

The JTTF and its local offices would “investigate potential Federal crimes” relating to “recruiting or radicalizing persons” for political violence, terrorism, conspiracy against rights or the violent deprivation of a citizens’ rights.

The directive also said that institutional and individual funders, as well as offices and employees of organizations, deemed responsible for, sponsoring or aiding “principal actors engaging in the criminal conduct” can be investigated. Nongovernmental organizations and Americans abroad with “close ties to foreign governments, agents, citizens, foundations, or influence networks engaged in violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act” could also be investigated.

It listed “common threads animating this violence conduct,” including anti-American, anti-capitalist and anti-Christian views. It also mentioned “support for the overthrow of the United States government,” “extremism” on gender, race and migration, and hostility toward individuals who hold “traditional American views on family, religion, and morality” in naming the “threads.”

Nonprofits Rebuke Trump Directive

The directive has sparked alarm from nonprofits and other critics of the administration, who believe it is a form of retribution against those who have funded left-wing groups like billionaire George Soros, who Trump said would be a “likely candidate” for investigation, according to The New York Times.

More than 3,000 nonprofit organizations from across the United States rejected the missive in an open letter provided to Newsweek.

“We won’t mince words. No president–Democrat or Republican–should have the power to punish nonprofit organizations he disagrees with. That is not about protecting Americans or defending the public interest. It is about using unchecked power to silence opposition and voices he disagrees with,” the letter reads. “That is un-American and flies in the face of the Constitution, including the First Amendment bar on targeting organizations for their advocacy.”

They wrote that the organizations threatened by the directive “have a mission to serve the public good” and are “composed of everyday people fighting for dignity, safety, and opportunity.”

“This attack on nonprofits is not happening in a vacuum, but as a part of a wholesale offensive against organizations and individuals that advocate for ideas or serve communities that the president finds objectionable, and that seek to enforce the rule of law against the federal government. Whether the target is a church, an environmental or good government group, a refugee assistance organization, university, a law firm, or a former or current government official, weaponizing the executive branch to punish their speech or their views is illegal and wrong,” the letter reads.

Lawyer Norm Eisen, co-founder of Democracy Defenders Fund—one of the groups represented in the letter—told Newsweek the letter shows that nonprofits are “standing strong” against the directive.

“Over 3,700 of them are speaking out in a single voice to say nonprofits are an essential part of our country. They have First Amendment and other legal rights,” he said.

The directive itself does not create any new laws and is “simply a rehash of existing legal authorities,” he added.

“What’s concerning is it targets them at only one set of political adversaries,” he said. “That’s not how the White House is supposed to work. That’s not American, and that’s not what we want from our president.”

In a statement to Newsweek, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson wrote, “Left-wing organizations have fueled violent riots, organized attacks against law enforcement officers, coordinated illegal doxing campaigns, arranged drop points for weapons and riot materials, and more. The Trump Administration will get to the bottom of this vast network inciting violence in American communities, and the President’s executive actions to address left-wing violence will start to put an end to any illegal activities.”

Legal Analysts Weigh in on Trump Directive

Lee Rowland, executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship, told Newsweek the order is “troubling in its own right” from a free speech point of view, but is even more so when read “in the context of the current moment.”

“This is an order that effectively claims to marshal the resources of the federal government to use force against political opposition. It does so by noting that the government … wants to stop any kind of political violence before it happens, which of course in some context is a worthy goal, as long as you are not penalizing protected expression to do that,” she said.

Rowland pointed to a segment of the directive that reads political violence is a culmination of “sophisticated, organized campaigns of targeted intimidation, radicalization, threats, and violence designed to silence opposing speech, limit political activity, change or direct policy outcomes, and prevent the functioning of a democratic society” as one point of concern.

Language surrounding “changing or directing policy outcomes” is particularly “chilling,” she said. “Radical ideas designed to change policy outcomes are also known as political speech at the very core of the First Amendment. Period, full stop.”

Any nonprofits investigated may have a First Amendment claim, she added. The president does not have the authority to “change the baseline of our constitutional rights,” but this sort of order could “cause confusion, fear and self-censorship,” Rowland said.

Michael McAuliffe, ex-federal prosecutor and former elected state attorney, told Newsweek that the directive uses existing mechanisms but layers on “new, far-reaching investigative and prosecutorial mandates.”

“Some of the additional focus may not prove especially controversial, but the new sweep doesn’t stop at the historical line––threats or acts of violence-–and appears to encompass a far more diffuse set of activities. And some of the newly targeted conduct may well be constitutionally protected protesting, not willful criminality,” he said.

In particular, he said, the phrase “otherwise aid and abet” political violence could be “used by the administration to reach conduct that has been deemed well within traditional protesting.”

Whether or not the directive is beneficial to public safety depends on exactly where the enforcement lines are drawn, McAuliffe added.

“The current language coming from the administration about political opponents does little to address the concern that the memorandum is a not-so-subtle act of intimidation directed at those who vocally oppose Trump and his politics,” he said.

Several legal firms have issued memos raising concerns about the missive’s effect on foundations and nonprofit organizations. A memo published by WilmerHale warned that nonprofits “may face increased scrutiny, including IRS investigations, terrorism designations, and asset freezes targeting both the organizations and their officers.”

What People Are Saying

More than 3,000 nonprofit organizations wrote in the open letter: “Efforts by the president of the United States to defund, discredit, and dismantle nonprofit groups he disagrees with are reprehensible and dangerous—a violation of a fundamental freedom in America. This Administration is trying to bully people into silence but speaking out is, and has always been, our collective mission. We stand with those wrongly targeted and with each other. No exceptions.”

Representative Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, wrote to X: “Trump’s NSPM-7 represses freedom of speech & association, investigating any organization with “anti-capitalism” or “anti-American” views. I ran a primary in 2003 against the Patriot Act & war in Iraq. NSPM-7 is a greater infringement on freedoms than the Patriot Act.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said in remarks reported by ABC News: “There is an entire system of feeder organizations that provide money, resources, weapons. And when they’re attacking ICE officers, they’re attacking federal buildings. Whether isolating public officials for harassment, doxing, intimidation, and ultimately attempted assassination, it is all carefully planned, executed and thought through. It is terrorism on our soil.”

The directive reads: “There are common recurrent motivations and indicia uniting this pattern of violent and terroristic activities under the umbrella of self-described “anti-fascism.” These movements portray foundational American principles (e.g., support for law enforcement and border control) as “fascist” to justify and encourage acts of violent revolution. This “anti-fascist” lie has become the organizing rallying cry used by domestic terrorists to wage a violent assault against democratic institutions, constitutional rights, and fundamental American liberties. “

What Happens Next

The directive’s effect on nonprofits may be seen over the coming weeks and months.