The Southern Poverty Law Center’s descent from its once-vaunted role as a sentinel against extremism has been precipitous and ironic. An organization whose “hate map” promiscuously equates parental rights groups such as Moms for Liberty with neo-Nazi organizations now stands indicted by the Department of Justice on charges of wire fraud, false statements, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
Federal prosecutors allege that, between 2014 and 2023, the SPLC secretly funneled millions of donor dollars—more than $4 million by some accounts—to individuals associated with the very groups it professed to combat, including the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, and National Socialist outfits. Prepaid credit cards and shell accounts, it is said, facilitated this curious philanthropy.
To the disinterested observer, such revelations ought to suffice as a final discreditation. Yet portions of Corporate America remain stubbornly unpersuaded. Many large firms continue to rely on Benevity, a Canadian “corporate social responsibility” software provider, for employee charitable matching and donation programs.
Benevity’s platform has deployed the SPLC’s tendentious diagnostic tools—including its notorious hate map—to screen and redirect contributions away from conservative and religious nonprofits.
During the most recent proxy season, we at The Heritage Foundation discovered precisely this pattern while engaging with portfolio companies. The corporate representatives we engaged with claimed to be unaware that their charitable-giving infrastructure was, through Benevity, quietly blacklisting organizations such as the Family Research Council, Moms for Liberty, and the Alliance Defending Freedom.
When Heritage raised the issue in shareholder discussions with companies including Mastercard, Meta, and Salesforce, the investor-relations teams expressed appreciation for the clarification. They promptly addressed the matter with Benevity, and we withdrew our shareholder proposals once the issue was resolved.
These quiet victories illustrate both the problem’s pervasiveness and the efficacy of informed engagement. Yet they also underscore a broader failure: corporate stewards, in unwittingly outsourcing moral judgments to a discredited partisan actor, have permitted viewpoint discrimination to infiltrate the ostensibly neutral machinery of philanthropy. At a minimum, this raises the specter of a breach of duty to make fully informed business decisions.
The Department of Justice’s indictment has exposed the SPLC as an institution undeserving of corporate reliance or largesse. Firms that persist in donating to it must answer to their shareholders (and stakeholders) why they continue to support an organization alleged to have funded the Ku Klux Klan.
Even more pressing is the removal of the SPLC’s discredited “tools” for identifying so-called hate groups. A cottage industry of third-party providers has arisen around these materials, enabling discrimination against conservative and religious organizations and impairing their fundraising. Many corporations outsource charitable decisions, but the hypocrisy of relying on metrics from an entity now accused of subsidizing the extremism it once purported to dismantle defeats any claim to genuine social responsibility.
The irony is particularly striking: An organization that allegedly funded actual hate groups has supplied the very criteria by which to exclude houses of worship and pro-family groups on the basis that they were supposedly fomenting racial hatred.
This normalized discrimination has not gone unnoticed. Major asset managers such as Fidelity Investments and Vanguard have recently blocked or restricted donor-advised fund contributions to the SPLC in the wake of the federal charges.
Coalitions such as the 1792 Exchange, alongside organizations including Turning Point USA, Focus on the Family, PragerU, and the Center for Christian Virtue, are pressing corporations to uphold the American principles of free expression and nondiscrimination.
While Corporate America has begun retreating from the more overt excesses of the DEI and ESG enthusiasms that marked the “Great Awokening” of 2020, the embedded presence of SPLC materials in corporate infrastructure reveals how much work remains. Screening out conservative and religious organizations from employee matching programs should be anathema to any corporation professing fidelity to founding principles.
Conservatives should take heart that this hypocrisy is now under sustained challenge—from the Department of Justice on the legal front and from shareholder and advocacy efforts on the outside. Removing corporate reliance on SPLC materials and ending donations to a race-hustling enterprise would mark a welcome restoration of intellectual honesty and neutrality in American business. The unglamorous reign of the SPLC as self-appointed arbiter of morality deserves a decisive end.
Continue reading...
[ H/T The Daily Signal ]
