As a former member of Congress and a lawyer who spent years watching how our legal system actually works, I am deeply troubled by a quiet but corrosive practice that has grown into a multibillion-dollar industry: third-party litigation funding. Outside investors and activist organizations put up the money for lawsuits in exchange for a cut of any settlement or judgment or to implement left-wing policies. Too often, the real funders hide behind shell companies, nonprofits, and layered ownership structures. Courts, defendants, and the public frequently have no idea who holds a financial or policy stake in the outcome, or who is effectively directing the litigation.
This anonymity is not a minor procedural quirk. It has become a preferred tool for left-wing socialists and progressive funders, including international NGOs and wealthy foreign donors, to wage lawfare against President Donald Trump, his agenda, and loyal Americans who support it. The result is delayed infrastructure, stalled energy projects, higher costs for businesses, and a drag on the American economy that hits workers and families hardest.
Recommended Stories
Consider the pattern. Billionaire Reid Hoffman was revealed as a key funder of the E. Jean Carroll case against Trump, routed through a nonprofit front. New York Attorney General Letitia James has turned to the Democratic Attorneys General Association for support after federal scrutiny. That group’s donors include Amalgamated Bank, labor organizations, and entities with opaque funding. Michael Bloomberg’s foundation has paid the salaries of “special assistant attorneys” embedded in Democratic state AG offices, an operation launched in 2017 with leadership drawn from prior Democratic administrations, to pursue environmental and other suits against the first Trump administration. The ACLU filed roughly 400 lawsuits against the first Trump administration and has continued the campaign. It has accepted millions from Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss, funneled through fronts such as the Berger Action Fund, which distributed tens of millions to left-wing groups over the past 12 months. Democracy Forward, chaired by Marc Elias, has been a prolific source of high-profile challenges to Trump policies on healthcare, immigration, and more; its backers include the Sandler Foundation and the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation.
These are not isolated cases of ordinary citizens seeking justice. They reflect coordinated efforts by progressive networks, often with foreign money in the mix, to use American courts as a political weapon. The same ecosystem that bankrolls endless litigation against energy development, border security, manufacturing, and conservative priorities is increasingly aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America and their candidates. When foreign capital flows through U.S. nonprofits and litigation funders to advance an explicitly socialist agenda, it creates a backdoor for overseas influence over American elections and policy. That is the opposite of transparent democracy.
The economic damage is real. The danger is real. Endless lawsuits delay pipelines, data centers, defense work, and industrial projects. Estimates put the broader costs of the tort system in the thousands of dollars per household annually, with third-party funding amplifying the problem by encouraging cases to be pursued for maximum extraction rather than on pure merit. Foreign competitors understand this. Litigation can slow American energy production, technology, and manufacturing as effectively as regulation. When the true financial backers remain hidden, our courts become a vector for commercial rivals and geopolitical actors to politicize justice while American workers pay the price in lost jobs and higher costs.
Trump has an immediate opportunity to shine sunlight on this practice. The anonymity of litigation funders and their investors creates a sinister opening for foreign actors and commercial competitors. While litigation funding can sometimes help legitimate plaintiffs access the courts, secrecy about who is really writing the checks undermines confidence in the system. Importantly, the President’s own legal defense funding has been transparent and well-documented — a standard the other side should meet.
An executive order could begin unmasking these backers by directing the executive branch to use existing authorities. Within 90 days, the Treasury Department, through FinCEN, could issue a rule under the Corporate Transparency Act treating litigation funders as entities required to report their beneficial owners — and reverse any prior narrowing of that reporting. Treasury and the IRS could propose rules requiring funders (including those providing loans to underwrite litigation) to file public reports identifying the case, parties, underlying investors, and amounts involved. Treasury could also examine designating litigation funders under the Bank Secrecy Act, triggering know-your-customer and record-keeping obligations. The SEC could be directed, consistent with Executive Order 14215’s emphasis on aligning independent agencies with administration priorities, to assess whether stakes in pooled litigation funds constitute investments subject to disclosure rules. Finally, the Attorney General and Treasury should recommend legislation to Congress requiring disclosure of funders and investors in federal cases, along with any needed changes to federal court rules.
WHITE GUILT IS DEAD — AND WE KILLED IT
These steps would not decide the merits of any lawsuit. They would simply ensure that judges, parties, and the public know who has a financial or ideological stake. Congress has already advanced related measures. The President can lead by maximizing transparency within existing executive powers while pressing for statutory fixes.
For years, Republicans have rightly demanded sunlight on foreign influence in lobbying, universities, and political spending. The same principle must apply to our courtrooms. When progressive funders and international NGOs can bankroll lawsuits that attack a duly elected president’s agenda, delay American energy and manufacturing, and quietly advance socialist candidates through opaque channels, the integrity of both our economy and our democracy is at risk. Transparency should be bipartisan. It is necessary for a system that claims to deliver equal justice under the law. The President can, and should, act to unmask the hidden hands behind this lawfare. America’s workers and the rule of law deserve nothing less.
Gregg Harper is a Republican former U.S. Representative from Mississippi.
