House Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-KY) sent a letter on June 11 to Democracy Defenders, a non-profit group chaired by Washington DC lawyer Norm Eisen, questioning that group’s public opposition to Paramount’s proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery. Comer also mentioned other actions of the group that he claimed were to “advance the interests” of the unions UAW and Communications Workers of America or the law firm Platkin LLP, “as well as a seemingly arbitrary attack on Apple Inc. over a gift presented to President Trump…”

Comer claimed to be “concerned” that Democracy Defenders “may … be working on a pay-to-play basis to unethically and illegally ingratiate itself to donors and/or potential donors by taking more than incidental actions to advance their private financial interests,” in alleged violation of the group’s non-profit status.

Comer has asked Democracy Defenders to provide documents related to its guidelines for accepting donations and its involvement with the Paramount/Discovery matter and other issues.

It is a legitimate concern if a non-profit group accepts funding from companies, unions, or individuals and then advocates for the economic interests of such entities. In fact, this appears to happen on a regular basis, especially by groups on the right.  

For example, Tucker Carlson’s non-profit Daily Caller Foundation seemed to offer pay-to-play journalism for donors. 

Non-profit groups such as Consumer Action for a Sound Economy (CASE) undertake advocacy campaigns that align with the interests of specific corporations or sectors. 

If a group’s work is heavily focused on advancing private interests, and especially if those interests are funding the group — with or without an explicit quid pro quo arrangement — it can create serious issues as to whether a group is acting consistent with Internal Revenue Service laws and rules governing non-profits.

But engaging in advocacy on policy or legal issues that concern corporations or unions is certainly consistent with non-profit status. It’s a huge part of what policy advocacy groups do.  Nothing in Comer’s letter suggests he has any evidence that Democracy Defenders is pay-to-play or driven by fealty to private interests. There are powerful arguments that consumers, artists, and other workers, and the public’s right in a democracy to free access to a diverse range of news and information, will be harmed if the Paramount-Discovery deal goes through. 

The letter appears to be more bullying by a Trump ally on behalf of Trump’s increasingly close friends the tech billionaire Larry Ellison and his son David Ellison, the head of Paramount Skydance, which has just obtained approval from the Trump Justice Department, reportedly brushing aside concerns of career Department lawyers, to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.  The likely aim is to punish and deter critics of the deal, while Ellison seeks to push it past other potential barriers, such as review by state attorneys general.

Eisen issued a statement last week saying that Democracy Defenders would “fully cooperate with any legitimate oversight request while making clear what this is: a political attack masquerading as an investigation.”

Non-profits should make sure to never allow private interests to set their agendas and dictate their messages. But groups that continue to act on their own values and policy convictions should not be deterred by these kinds of threats from MAGA- and corporate-backed interests. The public interest community will have their backs if such attacks occur.