speech first
-=-=
-=-=
RawStory NO LNX $
RawStory
Secret donors paid millions to Clarence Thomas-linked law firm with Supreme Court cases
Alexandria Jacobson, Investigative Reporter
September 21, 2026
Secret donors paid millions to Clarence Thomas-linked law firm with Supreme Court cases
Clarence Thomas attends the swearing-in ceremony of Pam Bondi as attorney general at the White House. Photograph: Kent Nishimura/Reuters
A conservative law firm with deep ties to Justice Clarence Thomas, President Donald Trump and a history of arguing more than a dozen cases on hot-button right-wing causes before the Supreme Court took in more than $33.5 million from nonprofit dark money networks, according to new watchdog research.
Consovoy McCarthy, a boutique conservative law firm started in 2014, brought in more than $29 million since 2015 from nonprofits associated with Leonard Leo, a co-chair of the Federalist Society, a Project 2025 contributor and architect of the conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court, alone, according to tax filings analyzed by True North Research, a progressive investigative research firm.
Leo has a well-documented history of using his networks to funnel money to ultraconservative causes, from working to limit access to abortion medication to supporting anti-trans laws.
ALSO READ: Bombshell memo on horrific race massacre exposes complicit FBI: 'They lied like crazy'
Nonprofits do not need to disclose the identities of their donors, and when such groups support political causes without revealing the sources of their funding, it's considered “dark money.”
Consovoy McCarthy has “become a go-to for these far-right networks, especially networks tied to Leonard Leo ... who's seeking to impose his agenda on all Americans by weaponizing the court system,” said Alyssa Bowen, deputy director at True North Research.
“We've seen Consovoy McCarthy undertake a ton of cases furthering Leo's agenda as they're enriching themselves with Leo cash and cash from other far-right dark money operatives.”
Have a tip? I want to hear it.
I'm an investigative reporter covering politics and government accountability. If you have information the public should know — inside government, a campaign or anywhere power operates with too little scrutiny — I want to hear from you."
I protect sources and can communicate securely and confidentially.
Alexandria Jacobson
Investigative Reporter, Raw Story
alexandria@rawstory.com
Consovoy McCarthy took in money from nonprofits associated with other conservative activists like Edward Blum, who has brought at least eight cases to the Supreme Court, mostly about race-conscious college admissions and voting rights.
“You've got money funneled through a nonprofit organization, you don't really know if there's a wealthy mega donor or special interest helping bankroll the legal arguments that are appearing before a court,” said Michael Beckel, money in politics reform director at Issue One, a bipartisan nonprofit that advocates for reducing the influence of money in politics.
“You don't know if a wealthy donor or special interest is helping underwrite this type of legal advocacy when so much money flows through a nonprofit network.”
Consovoy McCarthy argued high-profile cases before the Supreme Court, including Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which effectively ended affirmative action in 2023 and was spearheaded by Blum.
The biggest nonprofit contribution Consovoy McCarthy took in was more than $1.8 million from Students for Fair Admissions in 2018.
In total, the firm took in nearly $8.8 million from the nonprofit founded by Blum, according to tax filings.
“There's a lot of money behind the legal challenges to a lot of these high-profile cases that we see from voting rights law to affirmative action cases, other race-conscious policies,” Beckel said.
“These are very hot-button issues right now, and where there's heat, there's fire, and when you've got the ability to bring big guns into the courtroom, there's some donors who are more than willing to have their money help pay for that type of legal representation all across the ideological spectrum.”
The firm also represented Trump in his effort to conceal his tax returns.
Six of Consovoy McCarthy’s 11 partners clerked for Thomas. Another clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts.
“When you've got many of your partners previously clerking for a specific Supreme Court justice, that can give you an edge in the courtroom. That can give you an edge in recruiting and landing new clients. It can give you an edge in landing major cases before the Supreme Court,” Beckel said.
“These are individuals who might have a particular insight into how Clarence Thomas approaches the decisions that he makes on the bench. If you've got lawyers with special insights into how a Supreme Court justice thinks, that can be very lucrative.”
Thomas McCarthy, co-founder of Consovoy McCarthy, Blum and Leo could not be immediately reached for comment for this story.
'Sad state of politics'
The 85 Fund, managed by Leo, is formerly known as the Judicial Education Project and is the oldest in his dark money network. It gave Consovoy McCarthy $5.65 million between 2016 and 2023.
America First Legal Foundation, co-founded by Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff and a recipient of funding from the Leo-connected donor-advised fund, DonorsTrust, paid Consovoy McCarthy nearly $235,000 in 2022.
Do No Harm, a medical and policy advocacy nonprofit associated with Blum and funded by Leo's network, paid Consovoy McCarthy more than $1.4 million total in 2022 and 2024. The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated Do No Harm as an anti-LGBTQ+ hate group that promotes conversion therapy.
Consovoy McCarthy was paid more than $544,000 from the Project on Fair Representation, founded by Blum.
“There's a coordinated effort by a few billionaire-backed political operatives that are throwing … their weight behind legal cases that undermine policies that help people and benefit politicians or billionaires,” Bowen said.
Speech First, which says it works to protect free speech rights on college campuses and is associated with the conservative billionaire Koch brothers, paid the firm more than $7.3 million total between 2018 and 2024.
The U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, which works on “defending Trump-era deregulation in court,” paid Consovoy McCarthy nearly $200,000.
Defending Education, formerly Parents Defending Education, which advocates for removing critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion from schools, paid Consovoy McCarthy $4 million total since 2021. Blum is a board member.
These nonprofits have been considered dark money networks with lack of transparency about their funders.
“Dark money has an incredible influence in the judicial system, as well as the political arena writ large,” Beckel said.
-=-=
an 6 22
The University of Houston has settled with a conservative free speech group that sued the school over an anti-discrimination policy that the group argued was overly broad and violated students’ First Amendment rights.
As part of the settlement, UH officials will have to pay $30,000 in attorney’s fees to Speech First and UH officials must keep in place its amended anti-discrimination policy.
In this case, Speech First, a group that actively litigates college policies they view as student censorship, targeted UH’s anti-discrimination policy that has been in place since 2012. According to that policy, unlawful harassment was defined as “humiliating, abusive, or threatening conduct or behavior that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion toward an individual or group” or conduct that created a hostile living or working environment or interfered with an individual’s academic or work performance.
Examples of such harassment included “epithets or slurs,” “negative stereotyping” and “denigrating jokes.”
It also stated “[m]inor verbal and nonverbal slights, snubs, annoyances, insults, or isolated incidentsincluding, but not limited to microaggressions,” would be considered harassmentif the actions occurred repeatedly and targeted a particular group of people based on their race, sex or gender or other status that keeps them protected from discrimination.
But in May, three months after Speech First filed its suit, the university amended its policy. Later that same month, U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes, a Reagan appointee, blocked the university from reinstating its original anti-harassment policy.
“This is a huge win for the First Amendment,” said Cherise Trump, executive director of Speech First, a group that pushes back against what it calls “toxic censorship culture” on campuses. “It sends a message to the University of Houston and other universities that they will be held accountable if they enact unconstitutional policies on campus.”
In a statement, UH officials said they have come to an “amicable” agreement and consider the matter resolved.
“As a result of our discussions, a revised anti-discrimination policy has been adopted,” Chris Stipes, director of UH media relations, said in a statement. “The UH System remains committed to protecting the constitutional rights of our students and employees.”
Speech First filed the lawsuit on behalf of three conservative students identified only as “A,” “B” and “C” who said they felt they could not express their beliefs on campus for fear they would be punished under UH’s older policy.
As examples, the lawsuit listed how the students feared retaliation if they shared personal beliefs such as “affirmative action in college admissions is racist” or “allowing biologically male athletes who identify as female to compete in women’s sports is fundamentally unjust.” All three said they were uncomfortable acknowledging fellow students’ preferred pronouns outside of a cisgender identity.
In documents, lawyers for the university argued that its policy specifically addresses unlawful harassment of students and would not consider those statements and ideas provided by the students in the lawsuit as a violation of the policy.
University lawyers have also argued there is no evidence that the anti-discrimination policy has ever been used against students.
When the university amended the anti-discrimination policy in mid-May, it specified that harassment must rise to the level of creating a hostile work environment for employees or to deny a student equal access to education by creating a hostile learning environment. That is the standard set by the 1999 Supreme Court decision in Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, which states that schools violate the Title IX ban on sex-based discrimination if they remain deliberately indifferent to sexual harassment to the point it prevents a student from receiving an equitable education.
Two years ago, the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights under former President Donald Trump used that definition of sexual harassment when it issued revised rules and standards for investigating Title IX violations on college campuses, which was a more narrow definition for sexual harassment than any previously used.
Speech First lawyers argue that many universities, including UH, adopt harassment policies outside of that guidance that are too broad, providing a chilling effect to students’ free speech.
A UH lawyer said the definition of sexual harassment in the Davis case did not limit schools from enacting other policies to address unlawful harassment and should not be considered the standard for universities as they craft disciplinary policies to address other instances of inappropriate behavior.
“Speech First has tried to bootstrap Davis in numerous other cases, and to date none has held that Davis imposed the outer bounds for addressing unlawful harassment,” they wrote.
But when Hughes, the federal district judge, granted a preliminary injunction late last month preventing UH from reinstating its original anti-harassment policy, he sided with Speech First.
“Restraint on free speech is prohibited absent limited circumstances carefully proscribed by the Supreme Court. Any limitation deserves the upmost scrutiny,” he wrote, stating the group would likely win the case. “The University says that it will be injured if recourse is unavailable for harassment against students of faculty. As important as that is, students also need defenses against arbitrary professors.”
This is the latest victory for Speech First, which has sued universities across the country over free speech policies, including the University of Texas at Austin. The case against UT-Austin took a similar path. Speech First sued the university in 2018 over language in multiple freedom of expression policies. UT-Austin amended some of the policies before settling with the organization and agreed to discontinue the university’s Campus Climate Response Team, part of the division of student affairs and the division of diversity and student engagement that investigated student reports of bias incidents on campus.
This lawsuit comes as other free speech debates have bubbled up on Texas college campuses throughout this past academic year.
At Collin College in North Texas, three professors have sued the school, arguing their contracts were not renewed in retaliation for exercising their First Amendment rights on a variety of issues, including one professor who publicly criticized the school’s COVID-19 response.
Nearby at the University of North Texas in Denton, thousands of students and community members signed a petition calling on school administrators to expel a right-wing student, arguing her campus activism and statements opposing gender-affirming care for transgender children created an unsafe learning environment for transgender students on campus.
In that instance, administrators denounced the student’s comments, but they said she and her right-wing campus group had not violated any university policies.
mass profs
koch Connections and Sham Grassroots of Parents Defending Education
Posted on April 12, 2021 by Maurice Cunningham
Parents Defending Education is corporate school privatizers going hard right to attack school boards, superintendents, principals, and teachers. It’s a dirty game and it’s about as grassroots as say, a Koch political operation.
Mercedes Schneider has figured out the grassroots angle in Parents Defending Education: Prefab “Grassroots”—PDE needs local connections to claim standing in law suits to chill the free speech of any educator who questions white supremacy. Peter Greene minces no words in Parents Defending Education: Astroturf Goes Hard Right:
PDE is particularly odious because of its whole “turn in any teacher or school that offends you” approach to chilling conversation and teaching. This is not just astrotyurf (sic), but astroturf with its brown shirt on.
So how well has PDE done living up to its self-promotion “as a national grassroots organization?” Really, really badly.
In order to test the grassroots claim I examined the local organizations PDE claims at its IndoctriNation (get it?) map. Wow—it looks like PDE is blanketing the nation. But it’s fake. Two organizations dominate the “grassroots” network: state affiliates of No Left Turn in Education and Moms For Liberty.Mercedes Schneider showed that Parents Defending Education has yet to attain non-profit status from the IRS. Well, neither has No Left Turn in Education or Moms For Liberty. Both are put up jobs to populate PDE’s map and give the appearance of local support. PDE provides links to the Facebook or websites of their “members” so we can see that most of these groups were formed in March or February 2021, rarely earlier. It’s a set up.
Grassroots means folks joining together on the local level in a collective effort to improve their community. Here are some of the membership numbers for No Left Turn in Education affiliates: Alabama, 7; Arkansas, 3; Delaware, 6; Iowa, 2; Idaho, 4; Indiana, 8; Michigan (Betsy DeVos home state), 13; Mississippi, 3; Montana, 2; North Dakota, 2; Massachusetts, 17. Well, you get the idea. And my favorite, Hawaii: 1.
And Moms for Liberty? Arizona, 17; Wright Co, Minnesota, 8; Corpus Christi Nueces, Texas, 70. Both groups have a handful of states with dozens of members and even over a hundred, but almost all of these operations are tied in with the creation of PDE.
If you start alphabetically with No Left Turn in Education Alabama their FB page is bannered with this:
Are those kids adorable or what? So diverse, so happy, so wholesome, so lovely—not a single pimple on their beautiful teenage faces! Why, it’s almost as if they’re . . .models? And you’d better like the pic because it’s on the website of every state affiliate of No Left Turn in Education. So representative of local students is far right extremism with a cuddly title. It offers to help followers set up a Madison Meetup to discuss the true meaning of the Founding. Readings include the “’Declaration of Independence’ brochure guide by Moms for Liberty” and “How to Read the Declaration of Independence and Constitution” by Paul Skousen, a far right author. His book The Naked Socialist completed the work of his late father W. Cleon Skousen, a supporter of the John Birch Society once described by National Review as an “all-around nutjob.”
Moms for Liberty’s creation story is similar to others in the anti-public education universe: “moms on a mission to stoke the fires of liberty.” In a year and a half Moms for Liberty’s Form 990 tax returns are likely to show thesetwo patriotic moms hauling down in excess of $150,000 each.
As for who is responsible for collecting the names of these culture warriors, PDE has something called a director of outreach and that is Erika Sanzi. She is a veteran of privatization operationsincluding, as Ms. Schneider shows, the billionaire funded Education Post. Ms. Schneider details what we know of Ms. Sanzi’s lucrative attachment to the privatization industry: $82,000 from Ed Post in 2015, $120,000 in 2016, $131,000 in 2017, and $121,000 in 2018.
Perhaps it was Ms. Sanzi who recruited another member, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. Here is what the Sourcewatch project of the Center for Media and Democracy has to say: “Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has deep ties to the Koch brothers. The organization has received millions in funding from the Charles G. Koch Foundation, the Claude R. Lambe Foundation, and the Stand Together Trust.” The group is also a pet project of the radical right funders Bradley Foundation and a passel of other anti-democracy billionaires.
Or it could have been PDE president Nicole Neily who brought in the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. PDE’s website says “Nicole Neily is the president & founder of Parents Defending Education. She is also the president of Speech First, a national campus free speech organization, and has worked at the Independent Women’s Forum and the Cato Institute.” According to Sourcewatch
Speech First’s president and only listed employee, Nicole Neily has worked for many Koch-affiliated groups. Neily was the president of the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, the Cato Institute’s manager of external relations, the coalition relations manager for FreedomWorks’ Center for Global Economic Growth, and a “Koch summer fellow for both the Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights and the Competitive Enterprise Institute.”
Additionally, Neily is associated with other Koch-affiliated groups. Neily served as a board member for Young Voices and Young Americans for Liberty.
PDE also just added as a “senior fellow” Elizabeth Schultz, a former school committee person in Fairfax, VA most well-known for carrying water for the Traditional Values Coalition against a motion to include lessons on gender identity and transgender people in sex education classes. Her other major accomplishment is as an underqualified appointee of Betsy DeVos at the Department of Education.
PDE is yet another fake operation acting for right wing billionaires. So who would be dumb or dishonest enough (or both) to fall for the grassroots claim? Fox News, of course.
This looks like another Koch investment in destroying public goods in the United States. Through a joint venture with the Walton Family Foundation called the Vela Education Fund, Koch is underwriting the Christian right :{Home School Legal Defense Association and the pretend progressive National Parents Union:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}:. Still, this front seems more explicitly right wing than many other privatization ventures which have tended to put people of color out front and adopt the veneer of liberalism. So will Massachusetts Parents United reject No Left Turn in Education Massachusetts? Is Stop the Wait RI going to condemn No Left Turn in Education Rhode Island? And will National Parents Union vocally denounce the white supremacy of Parents Defending Education? We’ll be watching.
In the darkness of secrecy, sinister interest and evil in every shape, have full swing. . . . Publicity is the very soul of justice.”—Jeremy Bentham
[Full disclosure: as an educator in the UMass system, I am a union member. I write about dark money, democracy, and oligarchy.]
SW
speech First purports to be "a nonprofit membership association working to combat restrictions on free speech and other civil rights at colleges and universities across the United States."[1] It was founded in February of 2018.[2] As of May of that year had one employee, it's president Nicole Neily.[3] Speech First's legal actions have included joining a suit against affirmative action practices and against "bias response teams."[3]
- :{:{News and Controversies:(style="display:table-cell"):}::(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}:
- :{2:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Ties to the Koch Brothers:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{3:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Ties to the State Policy Network:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{4:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Funding:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{5:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Core Financials:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{6:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Personnel:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{7:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Contact Information:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{8:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Articles and Resources:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{8.1:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{IRS Form 990 Filings:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{8.2:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Application for Tax-Exempt Status:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{8.3:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{Articles:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
- :{9:(style="display:table-cell;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0.5em"):}::{References:(style="display:table-cell"):}:
News and Controversies
Lawsuit Against "Orwellian" Speech "Chilling" Policies
On May 08, 2018, Speech First filed a lawsuit, Speech First v. Schlissel et. al, asking "the court to declare that the school’s speech code and bias response team violate students’ rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments"[4]
After conservation with three students, who chose to remain anonymous, Speech First filed the suit because those students were "so afraid of the university's bias response team" that they could only speak with each other about politics in their dorm rooms. According to Politico, the bias response team "investigates claims of verbal harassment, racist incidents and the like." Neily describes the bias teams as "surprisingly Orwellian.” [3] Hans A. von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation claims the bias response team is "the university’s equivalent of the Thought Police."[5]
The University of Michigan says the lawsuit is "a false caricature” of the university’s free speech policies and practices.[6]
Ties to the Koch Brothers
Speech First's president and only listed employee, Nicole Neily has worked for many Koch-affiliated groups. Neily was the president of the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, the Cato Institute’s manager of external relations, the coalition relations manager for FreedomWorks’ Center for Global Economic Growth, and a "Koch summer fellow for both the Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights and the Competitive Enterprise Institute."[7]
Additionally, Neily is associated with other Koch-affiliated groups. Neily served as a board member for Young Voices and Young Americans for Liberty.[8]
According to UnKoch My Campus, "SpeechFirst's board members includeDonorsTrust Chair, Kim Dennis,and former ACLU deputy legal director, Jameel Jaffer. Jaffer is also the Executive Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which was recently promised a $3.25 million dollar commitment from the Charles Koch Foundation to “investigate and address the most pressing challenges to the freedoms of speech and the press.”The Knight Institute claims to have “encouraged debate and reflection” in issues including unwanted speakers being drown out, also known as “the heckler’s veto.” Meanwhile, Speech First has taken a firm position against it and is ready to sue."[9]
The Nation, characterized Speech First as "a highly professional astro-turfing campaign, with a board of former Bush Administration lawyers and longtime affiliates of the Koch family...Speech First’s board of directors includes a former head of a Koch-backed trust and two conservative attorneys from Koch-funded programs."[2]
| Koch Wiki |
|---|
| Charles Koch is the right-wing billionaire owner of Koch Industries. As one of the richest people in the world, he is a key funder of the right-wing infrastructure, including the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the State Policy Network (SPN). In SourceWatch, key articles on Charles Koch and his late brother David include: Koch Brothers, Americans for Prosperity, Stand Together Chamber of Commerce, Stand Together, Koch Family Foundations, Koch Universities, and I360. |
Ties to the State Policy Network
Speech First is an associate member of SPN. SPN is a web of right-wing “think tanks” and tax-exempt organizations in 50 states, Washington, D.C., Canada, and the United Kingdom. As of January 2022, SPN's membership totals 166. Today's SPN is the tip of the spear of far-right, nationally funded policy agenda in the states that undergirds extremists in the Republican Party.
SPN Executive Director Tracie Sharp told the Wall Street Journal in 2017 that the revenue of the combined groups was some $80 million, but a 2019 analysis of SPN's main members IRS filings by the Center for Media and Democracy shows that the combined revenue is over $120 million.[10] Although SPN's member organizations claim to be nonpartisan and independent, the Center for Media and Democracy's in-depth investigation, "EXPOSED: The State Policy Network -- The Powerful Right-Wing Network Helping to Hijack State Politics and Government," reveals that SPN and its member think tanks are major drivers of the right-wing, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)-backed corporate agenda in state houses nationwide, with deep ties to the Koch brothers and the national right-wing network of funders.[11]
In response to CMD's report, SPN Executive Director Tracie Sharp told national and statehouse reporters that SPN affiliates are "fiercely independent." Later the same week, however, The New Yorker's Jane Mayer caught Sharp in a contradiction. In her article, "Is IKEA the New Model for the Conservative Movement?," the Pulitzer-nominated reporter revealed that, in a recent meeting behind closed doors with the heads of SPN affiliates around the country, Sharp "compared the organization’s model to that of the giant global chain IKEA." She reportedly said that SPN "would provide 'the raw materials,' along with the 'services' needed to assemble the products. Rather than acting like passive customers who buy finished products, she wanted each state group to show the enterprise and creativity needed to assemble the parts in their home states. 'Pick what you need,' she said, 'and customize it for what works best for you.'" Not only that, but Sharp "also acknowledged privately to the members that the organization's often anonymous donors frequently shape the agenda. 'The grants are driven by donor intent,' she told the gathered think-tank heads. She added that, often, 'the donors have a very specific idea of what they want to happen.'"[12]
A set of coordinated fundraising proposals obtained and released by The Guardian in early December 2013 confirm many of these SPN members' intent to change state laws and policies, referring to "advancing model legislation" and "candidate briefings." These activities "arguably cross the line into lobbying," The Guardian notes.[13]
Funding
In May of 2018, Neily refused to disclose donor information to Politico and refused to say if the Kochs were involved to The Nation. The organization collects $5 dues from its members. Neily said in May that Speech First had around 1,000 members.[3] Such makes up a “negligible part” of Speech First's Funding "which mainly comes from undisclosed backers."[2]
Speech First is not required to disclose its funders. Its major funders, however, can be found through a search of IRS filings.
- Bader Family Foundation: $175,000 (2018-2019)
- Conru Foundation: $5,000 (2019)
- Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund: $500,250 (2018)
- Judicial Education Project: $1,000,000 (2017-2018)
- Melvin S Cohen Foundation: $10,000 (2020)
- National Philanthropic Trust: $1,050,000 (2018-2019)
- The 85 Fund: $1,000,000 (2019-2020)
Core Financials
2019[14]:
- Total Revenue: $1,262,640
- Total Expenses: $1,556,841
- Net Assets: $-267,533
2018[15]:
- Total Revenue: $1,253,461
- Total Expenses: $1,476,793
- Net Assets: $26,668
2017[16]:
- Total Revenue: $250,000
- Total Expenses: $0
- Net Assets: $250,000
Personnel
As of June 2021:[17]
Staff
- Nicole Neily, president
- Cherise Trump, executive director
Former Staff
- Ross Abbot, legal fellow
Board of Directors
As of June 2021:[18]
- Montse Alvarado
- Josh Holdenried
- Jamil Jaffer
- Kathryn Ciano Mauler
- Adam White
Former Directors
- Kim Dennis
- Kate Comerford Todd
Contact Information
Speech First
1030 15th St NW
Suite 374
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: (571) 766-6883
Email: info@speechfirst.org
Website: https://speechfirst.org/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/speech_first
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/speechfirstorg/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/speech_first/
Articles and Resources
duck 2 22
speech First - Free speech on campus matters
Speech First - Free speech on campus matters Stand with students to defend their constitutional rights. JOIN US > FEATURED STORIES CAMPUS SPEECH IS UNDER ATTACK From violent protestors heckling speakers to restrictive speech codes and trigger warnings, it's never been a more challenging time to express an unpopular opinion on campus.
- Speech First - Free speech on campus matters
Speech First will protect students' free speech rights on campus.
PROTECT FREE SPEECHStudents' free speech rights on campus are...
Speech First will protect students' free speech rights on campus.
Nicole Neily Nicole Neily is the president of Speech First. Nicole...
The Problem with Bias Response Teams Bias Response Teams (BRTs) are...
Speech First - Free speech on campus matters
Speech First will protect students' free speech rights on campus. Through advocacy, litigation, and education, we will put colleges and universities on notice that shutting down unwanted speech will no longer be tolerated. Speech First will fight for the First Amendment rights of students all over the country. Join the movement today! Our Team
Speech First - SourceWatch
Speech First is an associate member of SPN. SPN is a web of right-wing "think tanks" and tax-exempt organizations in 50 states, Washington, D.C., Canada, and the United Kingdom. As of January 2022, SPN's membership totals 166.
Speech First - Home | Facebook
Speech First. 6,108 likes · 210 talking about this. Speech First is a community of students, parents, faculty, alumni, and concerned citizens fighting for free speech rights on college campuses.
Meet Speech First, a New Combatant in the Campus Free ...
Speech First is a membership organization for students, faculty, parents, alumni, and concerned citizens. Members pay a one-time $5 fee, which connects them to a network of people "who are fighting...
Speech First - the New Organization Helping Students Sue ...
Feb 28, 2018Speech First - the New Organization Helping Students Sue Schools that Suppress Free Speech Students are afraid to speak their minds in class, according to a survey from the Foundation for...
Speech First, LLC - Home | Facebook
Speech First, LLC, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 168 likes. Lindsay Petersen, M.A. CCC-SLP/L offers comprehensive evaluations, private in-home speech therapy, and free 30 minute consultations.
Virginia Tech sued for allegedly chilling students' speech ...
Virginia Tech University is facing a fresh lawsuit from the nonprofit Speech First, which alleges that the university has set overly broad restrictions on students' expression. Filed on Thursday ...