Left and Right Join to Defend Nonprofit Rights
The leaders of the MacArthur Foundation and DonorsTrust came together for a moment of consensus on the importance of the freedom of philanthropies to give as they see fit.
By Alex Daniels
Senior Editor, Foundations
May 28, 2026 | Read Time: 5 minutes
Keep up with everything happening in The Commons by signing up for our monthly newsletter.
The leaders of the progressive MacArthur Foundation and DonorsTrust, a donor-advised fund that caters to conservative donors, don’t usually agree on much. But they came together for a moment of consensus last week at the libertarian Cato Institute.
John Palfrey, president of the MacArthur foundation, began by saying that the freedom of philanthropies to give as they see fit is sacrosanct. The government, he suggested, should keep its hands off.
“Ditto,” said Lawson Bader, head of DonorsTrust, nodding in agreement.
Both leaders made the case that the government should not interfere with donors and nonprofits on political grounds.
While Bader and Palfrey made their observations from different ideological vantage points, the two are in lock step on the notion of philanthropic freedom.
The right of donors and foundations to give as they like has been tested during the first year and a half of the Trump administration. The White House has threatened to revoke tax exempt status of nonprofits with missions counter to Trump’s policy objectives. It has created a law enforcement task force that is looking into whether progressive philanthropy has supported political violence. More recently, Trump’s Department of Justice indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center, a frequent antagonist of both extremist and mainstream conservative groups, on criminal fraud charges that critics say are politically motivated.
“Whether we agree that there should be a limited form of government or a more engaged form of government … I think we would all agree that there is a role for private voluntary efforts to improve our communities, Palfrey said, before turning to the SPLC case. “Striking at that particular institution is an area that I think many of us would agree, regardless of our ideological perspective, is a mistake.”
Philanthropy Is a Longstanding Target
Government interference in philanthropy has a long history, Bader said, drawing examples from the 19th century, when Thomas Jefferson intervened to try to stop the establishment of Dartmouth College as a private institution, through the 2013 Lois Lerner IRS scandal. Lerner, an IRS official, was accused of stalling on applications from Tea Party-affiliated groups for tax-exempt status. After lengthy investigations, she was exonerated.
Beware, said Bader, because what goes around comes around.
“If we are cheering what fundamentally appears to be a weaponization of government power against philanthropy from the current administration, it’s only going to come back to haunt us in the next administration,” he said.
While the federal government has encroached on philanthropy periodically over the years, interference during the Trump administration has intensified, said Walter Olson, a senior fellow at Cato. He cited the law enforcement task force on political violence and new limitations on a public service loan program that allows students to have educational loans forgiven if they work at a nonprofit. The Trump administration determined applicants are ineligible if they work for nonprofits that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. The administration is being sued over the change.
The Trump administration is acting as if it is “fair game to go after nonprofits on lots of grounds, sometimes for spurious political reasons,” Olson said. “That’s what’s different about this moment.”
Bridging Differences
Bader, a vocal champion of donor intent, has been critical of Trump’s attacks on nonprofits over the past year.
And Palfrey’s appearance at Cato is part of a broader effort he has undertaken to bring leaders together who have different points of view but share a common commitment to freedom of speech.
MacArthur has been a prominent supporter of progressive organizations that have been at odds with Trump administration policies. But Palfrey stressed that the Chicago grant maker has also supported efforts across the political spectrum. They include “Be the People,” a campaign that includes Stand Together, a donor network affiliated with conservative donor Charles Koch.
“We will fund multiple sides of an issue because we don’t know the answer,” he said. “Often what we have is a question.”
A Common Interest
The attacks on nonprofits have come, Bader said, because politicians on both sides of the aisle are motivated by “envy” of the money controlled by endowments.
“At a time when government likes to have money, the amount of wealth within the nonprofit community and the philanthropic community becomes a target.”
But efforts undertaken by philanthropy leaders to protect the freedom to give the way they see fit aren’t simply an exercise in self-defense, said Deepak Bhargava, president of the Freedom Together Foundation, in a separate interview. Coming together to push back against the Trump administration’s attacks is also a defense of freedom of speech and association for all people, he said.
“Our shared interest is in the fundamental freedoms that define American democracy,” he said. “Those are not right-wing ideas. Those are not left-wing ideas. So it’s not just about protecting our sector.”
Correction: A previous version of this article identified Brian Hooks of Stand Together as the founder of Be the People. The effort was created by a number of organizations.
The Commons is financed in part with philanthropic support from the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation, Einhorn Collaborative, and the Walton Family Foundation. None of our supporters have any control over or input into story selection, reporting, or editing, and they do not review articles before publication. See more about the Chronicle, the grants, how our foundation-supported journalism works, and our gift-acceptance policy.
