aw!! <3

Also @mariannedhe.bsky.social @willpotter.bsky.social @xrglobal.bsky.social @cefund.bsky.social @micahflee.com @hurwitz.bsky.social 8/

This newsletter post mentions @sierraclub.org @conservationco.bsky.social @biologicaldiversity.org @nextgenpolicy.bsky.social @sunrisemvmt.bsky.social @350.org @ienearth.bsky.social @honortheearth.bsky.social @weact4ej.bsky.social @dxeofficial.bsky.social 7/

As Lauren Regan from @cldc03.bsky.social put it to me, pre-compliance "teaches the regime that it can get what it wants in using these kinds of tactics and puts a larger price tag for the organizations that are going to stand up and resist.” 6/

The issue here is not JUST that groups could face audits or legal attacks — it's that the threat alone could chill people's willingness to support groups that participate in protest. That, in turn, could limit the ways people are able to fight to protect the environment. 5/

But that doesn't mean the Trump administration won't try, as it cracks down on the Left using the terrifying NSPM-7 www.whitehouse.gov/presidential... 4/

Maggie Ellinger-Locke, a lawyer with @afj.org told me non-profit involvement with disruptive protests is NOT grounds for losing tax-exempt status. "Incorporating some direct action into a broader advocacy strategy is not the issue." 3/

A right-wing group called Public Interest Watch (kinda similar to the Capital Research Center) wrote to the IRS, requesting an audit of Greenpeace.

Guess what? It didn't work. GP's non-profit status stayed in tact.

Guess who PIW's main funder was? Exxon Mobil

web.archive.org/web/20060417... 2/

A tidbit I found kind of remarkable as I reported this out is that Greenpeace experienced a foreshadowing of all this way back in 2005. @greenpeaceusa.bsky.social