Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Tensions were High as Representatives Debated Allegations Against the Southern Poverty Law Center

News

Tensions were High as Representatives Debated Allegations Against the Southern Poverty Law Center

Members of the House Judiciary Committee during the hearing on the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Credit: Olivia Ardito

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing last Wednesday examining claims that the Southern Poverty Law Center had funded the very hate groups the center aims to dismantle. Tensions were high as Republicans and Democrats fired back at each other. Noticeably absent was a representative from the center, a non-profit that since 1971 has fought for racial justice and against white supremacy.

The hearing came after the Texas Attorney General Ken Pax­ton announced last Monday that he was investigating the center. The U.S. Justice Department indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center in April for allegedly funneling money to people associated with violent extremist groups. The group has flatly rejected the accusations. While Republicans backed these claims, Democrats viewed the allegations as part of the Trump-backed efforts to hinder “DEI” and other racial justice initiatives.


Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, opened the hearing by discussing the Justice Department’s claims that the center paid members of white supremacist organizations, like the Ku Klux Klan, millions of dollars over the span of multiple years to manufacture hate and racism.

“[The Southern Poverty Law Center] said, ‘We're going to create the crisis. We're going to manufacture the crisis.’ And by so doing, they became the standard, the source for determining who’s a hate group and who isn’t. And of course, they labeled good, pro-family, conservative organizations as hate groups,” Jordan said.

Jordan’s claims also included assertions that the Southern Poverty Law Center collaborated with the Biden administration and was responsible for funding organizers of the Charlottesville white supremacist rally for the center’s own financial benefit.

The center “went from 51 million annual income to 133 million dollars. Turned out for them, creating hate was more profitable than fighting it. That’s exactly what they did. They ran a scam, they became the standard, they didn’t get prosecuted, and they made a ton of money,” Jordan said.

In a press release after the indictment, the Southern Poverty Law Center denied the allegations. “We are outraged by the false allegations levied against SPLC – an organization that for 55 years has stood as a beacon of hope fighting white supremacy and various forms of injustice to create a multi-racial democracy where we can all live and thrive,” the organization said.

In the hearing, Democrats reiterated this message. Rankin Member Jamie Raskin, D-Md., rebutted against the Republicans in his opening statement.

“For decades, the Southern Poverty Law Center shared information about racist terror plots with the FBI coming from their foreign program. The FBI was happy to receive it, and this practice frequently led to the disruption of dangerous conspiracies by the KKK and neo-Nazi groups to commit violence against synagogues, churches, African Americans, Jews, and other targeted minorities,” Raskin said.

Raskin followed his statement by expressing doubt about the indictment’s claims. His justification included that no civil lawsuits had been filed related to the charges, which Raskin said would be typical in fraud cases.

“What we’re witnessing is a Trump administration fraud on a vast and shocking scale. President Trump has coddled and cultivated the extreme right for as long as he's been in politics. After the infamous ‘Unite the Right’ rally in Charlottesville in August of 2017… Trump could only bring himself to say that there were some very fine people on both sides,” Raskin said.

Tensions during the hearing reached a high point when Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., called out Raskin for this comment.

“I do need to call out the ranking member for deliberately perpetuating the Democrats’ dishonest claim that Donald Trump praised the Nazis at Charlottesville, when he said there were, quote, ‘very fine people on both sides.’ What the ranking member knows, but chose to leave out, is that Trump then said, ‘I'm not talking about the neo Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally,’ unquote,” McClintock said.

McClintock was then interrupted by Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Georgia, who asked to have these words struck from the record. After over five minutes of back and forth, they decided not to have the word taken from the record.

After passionate speeches from both sides, intense questioning sessions and heated moments, the hearing ended after four and a half hours of discussion. Investigations likely will continue in Texas and there is no set court date for the federal indictment.

The hearing ended with Raskin attempting to subpoena Blanche and other officials to testify on President Trump’s recent $1.8 billion fund to compensate people who believe they were targeted by the federal government. The motion was tabled after an 18-17 vote that, like the hearing, was divided.

Olivia Ardito is a graduate student in journalism with Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism


Read More

Mutual Surveillance?: The History and Consequences of the Treaty on Open Skies

American flag on a military uniform

adamkaz/Getty Images

Mutual Surveillance?: The History and Consequences of the Treaty on Open Skies

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

This week's congressional agenda includes anti-fraud legislation, ICE funding, FISA Section 702 renewal debates, and major committee hearings.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Fraud, Funding, and FISA

Fraud

This week in the House is Fraud Week based on the large number of bills likely to receive a vote that in some way are intended to decrease or eliminate many different kinds of fraud. Example bills up for a vote include:

Funding

One bill will likely become law this week if it passes the House:

Keep ReadingShow less
Anti-gerrymandering sign

Florida's new congressional map, the Supreme Court's Callais decision, and challenges to voting rights protections raise urgent questions about redistricting, representation, and democratic accountability.

Bill Clark/Getty Images

Florida’s New Map and the Shrinking Window for Accountability

When the Lines Began Moving Faster Than the Law

On May 4, Governor Ron DeSantis signed Florida’s new congressional map into law. The Legislature had passed it five days earlier, 83 to 28 in the House and 21 to 17 in the Senate. The map redraws four districts in ways that election analysts project would shift them from competitive or Democratic-leaning to safe Republican, potentially expanding a delegation Republicans already control 20 to 8.

The same day the Legislature voted, the Supreme Court decided Louisiana v. Callais. The Court ruled 6 to 3 that Louisiana’s majority-minority district could not survive Equal Protection scrutiny under the standards applied by the majority. In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the ruling “renders Section 2 all but a dead letter” in redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less
The dome of the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., stands tall against a blue sky with the American flag waving proudly

A look at this week's congressional agenda, including House votes on Iran, Ukraine, FISA, appropriations, and key legislative priorities.

Getty Images, aire images

Legislative Preview for June 1, 2026

There will be plenty of coverage around the likely drama involved in picking up where House and Senate Republicans left off before this most recent week off. (For a recap, see our last post.) So we’re not going to go into any detail about what might happen with the reconciliation bill (originally only for two departments in the Department of Homeland Security; now enlarged with funding for the President’s ballroom project and overshadowed by the announcement of the President’s plan to pay off political allies with funds from the Department of Justice) or the FISA extension or the housing bill that’s been pingponging between chambers because you can read in sources like Politico about these marquee issue.

We will note that the Iran War resolution postponed in the House before the recess may be up for a vote this week, along with a resolution to remove US troops from Lebanon and a discharge petition (number 8) to put forward a bill authorizing support for Ukraine. Three privileged resolutions, of which one is a discharge petition (meaning it has 218 co-sponsors meaning at least a few House Republican co-sponsors), is a lot for one week. Especially when all three are expressing opposition to various administration stances and might get some House Republican votes.

Keep ReadingShow less