For 501(c)(3)s, it is. In exchange for tax-exempt status, a group loses certain options.
But the DOJ wouldn't touch those charges though as they're civil (IRS under Treasury) and the criminal charges could be fatal to the org by themselves.
Though, regardless of the criminal outcome, if the facts in the indictment are proven, I'd wager the IRS' case is proven implicitly which could also be fatal.
No it isn't. A 501c3 can't participate directly in a campaign. That's it, that's the whole rule. Plenty of 501c3's are nakedly and openly partisan. Center For American Progress is a c3. Heritage is a c3. AEI is a c3. Claremont is a c3.
Again, I encourage you to read Patrick's post, specifically the section titled "July 2021: The CTT coalition attempts non-partisan interdiction of Trump PAC fundraising" where it describes their direct involvement against a single, specific candidate's PAC.
You could make the claim "well, technically he wasn't a candidate at that time" but considering the PAC was a registered FEC entity raising money for campaign rallies, that argument is weak at best and absurd in reality.
> "Private actors working hard to censor political adversaries is not necessarily illegal, for what it's worth."
"Private actors" is doing quite a bit of work here.
For individuals working in their personal capacity, you're mostly correct. The rules change for certain jobs.
BUT that's not the situation here. In this case, we have the SPLC - a registered 501(c)(3) - that appears to have worked to censor political adversaries. And the law specifically bars that, making it illegal.
> Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
You're trying to axiomatically derive election law here. Every word in the statute matters. It is very probably perfectly lawful for SPLC to work to censor ideologies, even up to the point where those ideologies are coterminous with party definitions. The whole edifice of Citizens United is based on a sharp divide between advocacy and campaign finance; the argument you're putting forward is disfavored.
(That's not to say SPLC couldn't have fucked up and crossed the line, just that the general description given upthread of what they were doing did not in fact describe a violation of law).
Upthread summarizes Patrick accurately but maybe too succinctly, so to lay it out specifically:
In the post, Patrick demonstrates that the SPLC cofounded and led Change the Terms (CTT) then goes on to demonstrate CTT targeted a specific political candidate's fundraising. The first is fine, the second is illegal.
Check out the section titled "July 2021: The CTT coalition attempts non-partisan interdiction of Trump PAC fundraising" for specific quotes and even a picture of a mobile billboard they funded.
That is neither "ideologies" nor "party definitions"
I was one of two non-MSFT I knew of that had one.. and I bought it because an MSFT employee was showing it off and I was convinced. The concept of Tiles was great and Cortana was respectable. It felt comparable to Siri and way better than Google.
I used it for a couple years until the apps I needed started disappearing due to lack of updates.
There are TONS of incentives to increase energy efficiency.
Most local electric and gas companies will do free energy audits. Many will offer rebates if you install tankless water heaters, heat pumps, and insulation. Installers get kickbacks from manufacturers and tax credits if you buy higher efficiency equipment. Lenders will give you 0% loans to fund it all. The Feds and many States offer tax credits for all of the above.
I've done every single thing on this list in the last 5 years, some in Texas, some in Indiana.
I had a 20kWh array and 18kWh of batteries in Texas and it was GREAT in the summer. It'd start charging by 6am and be charged by 9am, even with simultaneous usage. Then we'd live off solar for the day (even with HVAC), go back on batteries around 9pm and they'd be out around 4am. No problem.
But during an overcast winter day, the stack wouldn't get power until 8/9, not make it to 50%, start discharging by 4/5pm, and be out by 10/11pm. It would easily be 8-10 hours where we were wholly dependent on the grid.
Not a problem, just a constraint to acknowledge and plan for.
To be fair, though, electricity is usually cheaper at night. So discharging solar charged batteries well into the evening is still a net benefit for the grid (and your wallet).
Was this approval before or after evaluators discovered this?
> Microsoft on Friday revised its practices to ensure that engineers in China no longer provide technical support to U.S. defense clients using the company’s cloud services.
> For example, I believe this implies that the DoW can procure data on US citizens en masse from private companies - including, e.g., granular location and financial transaction data - and apply OpenAI's tools to that data to surveil and otherwise target US citizens at scale.
Third Party Doctrine makes trouble for us once again.
Eliminate that and MANY nightmare scenarios disappear or become exceptionally more complicated.
MOST cases don't make it to jury. They're more likely to be resolved via motions and countermotions and the decisions of a jduge.
To dumb down "operating system" for normies, they're probably going to say something along the lines of "the software that makes your computer work.. like Windows." If it stays at that level, we'll have a specific, discrete definition in play.
A broader, equally correct definition could be "the software that makes technology work.. there's an operating system on your computer, your cell phone, your Alexa, and even your car." Then yes, some people will think of their Ring doorbell, the cash register at the coffee shop, and other embedded systems, even if they've never heard the word "embedded."
The definition that shows up will depend entirely on a) the context of the case and b) the savviness of the attorneys involved.
Defendants can always opt for a judge to rule on the case.
At that point, what the law actually says matters a lot (unless the judge is corrupt, which is becoming more common in the US, but with corrupt judges, it doesn’t really matter how good or bad the laws is).
You can mitigate/speed the process using your password manager too.
I still use a filter in my email so that if something comes in under my Gmail, it gets a special tag that I can filter on and treat those as a todo list. Rarely happens beyond the occasional Google Meet connection.
It's "intelligence platform" in the sense that you can gain a ton of information on individuals, organizations, and relationships that drive it all. If you can track how people move and interact between organizations, you can determine who someone is doing business with and even make an educated guess if that's a sale or interview.
But the DOJ wouldn't touch those charges though as they're civil (IRS under Treasury) and the criminal charges could be fatal to the org by themselves.
Though, regardless of the criminal outcome, if the facts in the indictment are proven, I'd wager the IRS' case is proven implicitly which could also be fatal.
reply