WASHINGTON, D.C. — As the orchestrators of the “No Kings” demonstrations aim to evolve their operation into a national voter mobilization effort this Saturday, their advice to avoid partisan messages seems largely ignored. An investigation by Fox News Digital has revealed that the political activation on the ground is, in fact, distinctly partisan, primarily spearheaded by the center-left Indivisible nonprofit, which has received significant funding from notable Democratic donor George Soros. Attempts to reach “No Kings” organizers for a comment went unanswered.
The partisan aspect of the events is critical because political analysts argue that the “No Kings” initiative embodies a clever electoral tactic: to turn the crowds gathered for anti-Trump protests into a lasting voter base that could deliver a “Blue Tsunami” in elections. However, federal election law prohibits nonprofits, including those financially supporting “No Kings,” from endorsing specific candidates.
Behind the scenes, Fox News Digital has uncovered a vast network encompassing 300 progressive advocacy groups, labor unions, and tax-exempt nonprofits with an estimated annual revenue of $2.5 billion, effectively transforming the “No Kings” movement into a voter-mobilization campaign comprising around 3,000 events geared towards Democrats.
A review of online promotions for the “No Kings: Vote Early” demonstrations highlights numerous instances where organizers inadvertently employ the very terminology their national guidelines say should be avoided, creating a facade of nonpartisanship. In Newark, Delaware, a local Indivisible chapter is not shy in encouraging attendees to don “blue” attire for their 2 p.m. gathering, with suggested slogans like “Vote Blue Nov. 3” and “Time for a Blue Tsunami.”
Meanwhile, all the way across the country in Roseburg, Oregon, activists from Indivisible Douglas County are rallying around their own “No Kings” event, brandishing signs with messages such as “DOUGLAS COUNTY VOTES BLUE!” and “VOTE EARLY. VOTE THEM OUT!” The Oregon organizers emphasized a bold, direct approach, urging participants not to hold back.
As protests were kicking off on Saturday morning, Eunic Epstein-Ortiz, the national spokesperson for No Kings, reached out to Fox News Digital to contest claims of partisanship, insisting that “No Kings” is a nonpartisan movement that aims to unite millions of Americans for democracy and against authoritarianism. She argued that their protests even attract Republicans, framing the events as a monumental early voting initiative.
A member of Indivisible Colorado Springs noted during an online discussion that attracting media coverage has been a struggle unless the event emphasizes President Trump. Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin encouraged this focus, suggesting they leverage the controversy.
Despite their guidelines stating that events should not be political or endorse election outcomes, local Democratic Party organizations are closely intertwined with the “No Kings” initiative. For instance, in Roseville, California, the Placer County Democratic Party openly promotes a canvassing operation linked to the “No Kings” rally, stating that participants will rally at the event to support “endorsed candidates.”
Similarly, in Springfield, Pennsylvania, an advertisement for a “No Kings” demonstration calls for voter engagement while also directly contradicting the national coalition’s guidelines by urging participants to “Vote Blue.”
The coalition’s own documentation makes its stance clear, outlining specific language to avoid—like encouraging attendees to vote for Democrats. They also warn against any partisan activities or remarks by speakers, emphasizing the necessity of nonpartisan discussions at events.
Nonetheless, in Kingstowne, Virginia, Indivisible’s local chapter promotes its rally with a statement urging accountability from leaders, effectively encouraging voters to remove those who don’t meet their expectations.
The documents indicate that labeling an event as “nonpartisan” doesn’t satisfy federal standards. This becomes particularly relevant as the coalition’s expansive reach includes numerous advocacy organizations with ties to Democratic agendas and a history of financial support for Democratic candidates.
Underlining how this campaign has evolved, the “No Kings” initiative is shifting its focus from protesting to mobilizing voters. They are employing a strategy to capitalize on the momentum from street demonstrations for electoral engagement. Their recent materials highlight the importance of voter education and early voting, asserting that participation should be encouraged from all eligible voters.
Legal considerations also loom over these activities, as tax-exempt organizations are prohibited from partisan political endorsements. The leading organizer, Indivisible, operates through various affiliated entities subject to differing tax regulations.
In discussions leading up to the nationwide “No Kings” protests, the co-founders of Indivisible spoke fervently about their electoral goals, emphasizing the importance of a Democratic majority. The coalition maintains that their efforts are meant to involve all eligible voters, regardless of political affiliation. Still, contradictions continue to emerge as they balance the lines between mobilizing support and adhering strictly to their proclaimed nonpartisan stance.
