In the final hours of the American fiscal year, the Trump administration quietly redirected $175 million in congressionally appropriated human rights funds toward a new vision of what those words mean — one that favors anti-communist foundations, white minority advocacy, and European far-right causes over the fund's historical mission of protecting vulnerable populations worldwide. Secretary of State Marco Rubio personally overrode bipartisan congressional holds to ensure the money was obligated before the deadline, a move that reveals not merely a policy shift but a philosophical redefinition
Trump administration redirects $175m human rights fund to far-right causes globally
These awards have been briefed at the highest levels of the department and have buy-in from the White House.
Mark
So the state department just moved $175 million in human rights money hours before it expired. Why does the timing matter so much?
Mimi
Because Congress had placed holds on $22 million of it. Those holds are a way to say: we want to review this before you spend it. The administration overrode them by obligating the money at the last possible moment—there was no time for Congress to respond.
Luke
But did they actually override the holds, or just obligate the money before Congress could act? Those are different things legally.
Mimi
The congressional aide said Rubio signed a memo to "disregard the holds and obligate the funds." That's pretty direct.
Mark
What kind of grants are we talking about? What makes them controversial?
Mimi
A $40 million anti-communism grant. Support for groups advancing white Afrikaner rights in South Africa. A campaign against Brazil's supreme court. Programs in Europe that explicitly exclude anything involving gender ideology or DEI.
Luke
Those are real grants with real names and real amounts. But the state department said the programs are still in "active deliberation." Can you obligate money that's still being deliberated?
Mark
That seems contradictory.
Mimi
It does. The state department also wouldn't confirm whether it had obligated the funds or overridden the holds. They just said the money would undergo "standard and rigorous vetting."
Luke
So we have a source saying it happened, but the agency won't confirm it. That's important to flag.
Mark
Who's actually running this? Is this coming from the top?
Mimi
A person familiar with the discussions said the awards have been "briefed at the highest levels of the department and have buy-in from the White House." The deputy assistant secretary overseeing the grants, Samuel Samson, has ties to the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation—the group getting the $40 million.
Luke
Ties through his graduate program at Hillsdale College. The state department said that relationship had nothing to do with the grant. We don't know if that's true.
Mark
What happened to the British grants?
Mimi
Two were withdrawn after Congress pushed back. A $5 million grant to the Free Speech Union and a $7 million grant to 878. Together they would have sent $15 million to groups run by sitting Conservative peers and a former cabinet minister.
Mark
Why were those withdrawn but the others weren't?
Luke
The source material doesn't say. We know they were reported in July and then marked withdrawn, but not why the administration decided to drop those two and keep the others.
Mimi
That's the real question—what made those two vulnerable to pressure when the others weren't?
O Pulso
- With hours left before $175 million in human rights funding would legally expire, the Trump administration raced to lock in 43 grants that bear little resemblance to the fund's half-century mission.
- Marco Rubio personally signed away congressional oversight, overriding ten bipartisan holds on $22 million in awards — a direct confrontation with the legislature's power of the purse.
- The grants expose a coordinated ideological project: anti-communism foundations with almost no prior federal funding suddenly receive $40 million, while groups tied to Brexit architects and anti-immigration peers were handed no-bid contracts.
- Congressional Democrats and foreign allies are alarmed, warning that redirecting democracy funds to established Western nations' far-right movements corrodes the credibility the US has spent decades building.
- Two British grants were quietly withdrawn after public exposure, but the remaining awards — still described as under 'active deliberation' — signal how deeply this redefinition of human rights has already taken hold.
In the final hours of the American fiscal year, the Trump administration quietly redirected $175 million in congressionally appropriated human rights funds toward a new vision of what those words mean — one that favors anti-communist foundations, white minority advocacy, and European far-right causes over the fund's historical mission of protecting vulnerable populations worldwide. Secretary of State Marco Rubio personally overrode bipartisan congressional holds to ensure the money was obligated before the deadline, a move that reveals not merely a policy shift but a philosophical redefinition of democracy itself. What a government chooses to protect with public funds is, in the end, a declaration of its values — and this administration has made its declaration plainly.
On the last day of the fiscal year, the Trump administration's State Department obligated $176.9 million across 43 grants before the money could legally lapse — bypassing explicit congressional holds and fundamentally reorienting what the US government considers a human rights cause worth funding. Secretary of State Marco Rubio personally signed a memo overriding ten bipartisan congressional holds on $22 million of those awards, a move the State Department declined to address publicly.
The largest single grant — $40 million — went to the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, a nonprofit that had received less than $100,000 in State Department contracts over the prior five years. A 27-year-old deputy assistant secretary with ties to the foundation oversaw the new grants, though the department denied any conflict. Other awards include a $2 million program explicitly excluding implementers who embrace what it calls 'gender ideology,' $1 million to fund Brazilian civil society groups opposing that country's supreme court, and a $3 million no-bid grant to a UK group that promoted Brexit as an opportunity to roll back climate regulations.
Two British grants — one to the Free Speech Union and one to a think tank co-founded by Jacob Rees-Mogg — were withdrawn after congressional and press scrutiny. Together they would have sent $15 million to organizations run by sitting Conservative peers. Sources told the Guardian that the awards reflect priorities personally championed by senior White House figures, including JD Vance's concerns about the erosion of Western values in Europe and Stephen Miller's focus on immigration and white minority advocacy in countries like South Africa.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, condemned the shift as a misuse of bipartisan appropriations meant to protect human rights defenders and democracy abroad. The State Department maintained that all programming would undergo rigorous vetting and that the grants support allies in defending their 'civilizational self-confidence.' What the full scope of awards makes clear is that the administration has not merely adjusted the fund's priorities — it has contested the meaning of the words at its center.
On the last day of the fiscal year, with hours remaining before a $175 million appropriation would expire, the Trump administration's state department moved to obligate the money to a constellation of grants that fundamentally recast what the US government considers worthy of human rights funding. The decision came despite explicit congressional holds and requests not to proceed, according to someone with knowledge of the negotiations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio personally signed a memo overriding ten congressional holds that had been placed on $22 million of the awards, according to a Democratic congressional aide. The state department declined to answer questions about whether it had overridden these holds or obligated the funds before the Wednesday deadline.
The 43 awards totaling $176.9 million represent a sharp departure from how the Human Rights and Democracy Fund has historically operated. The largest single grant—$40 million—went to a consortium led by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, an anti-communist nonprofit that had received only $96,997 in contracts from the state department over the previous five years. The foundation's vetting documents identify Andrew Bremberg, a former Trump White House domestic policy adviser and US ambassador to the UN European office, as a senior leader. A 27-year-old deputy assistant secretary named Samuel Samson, who has studied at the Christian conservative Hillsdale College graduate program and has been linked to senior members of the foundation, has overseen the new grants. In July, ProPublica reported the connection; a state department official later said the relationship had nothing to do with the grant decision.
The awards reveal how the administration is redefining human rights itself. One $2 million program titled "Promoting Western Civilization Allies" explicitly excludes implementers who subscribe to what it calls "ideologically weaponized accounts of human rights, such as gender ideology." Another $1 million award would fund civil society groups in Brazil opposing what the grant describes as judicial overreach by the country's supreme court—a direct alignment with the Trump administration's previous sanctions against Brazilian justice Alexandre de Moraes, which came after lobbying by Eduardo Bolsonaro, son of the former president. A $3 million no-bid award went to the Jobs Foundation, a UK group run by Matthew Elliott, who led the Vote Leave campaign; the grant aims to promote "common good capitalism" and pro-business policy, including how the foundation had promoted Brexit as an opportunity to cut climate regulations.
Two other British awards have since been withdrawn after congressional pushback. A $5 million no-bid grant to the Free Speech Union, founded by Toby Young, was marked withdrawn after the award was first reported in July. The grant would have paid the group to campaign against online safety and hate speech laws, including Britain's Online Safety Act passed in 2023. A $7 million no-bid award to 878, a thinktank founded by Jacob Rees-Mogg with stated missions including "ending mass migration and deporting illegal immigrants," was abandoned in July. Together, the British awards would have sent $15 million to groups run by sitting Conservative peers and a former cabinet minister.
Sources with knowledge of the grant process told the Guardian that the awards were personally lobbied for by members of the Trump administration and reflect interests including JD Vance's warnings about the collapse of traditional western values in Europe and Stephen Miller's push against immigration and support for white minorities in countries like South Africa. One person familiar with the discussions said: "The story for me is the high-level—including White House-directed—attention on these programs. These awards have been briefed at the highest levels of the department and have buy-in from the White House." A state department official defended the programming, saying it aims to "support our European allies in defending those rights and principles, along with their civilizational self-confidence and sovereignty from those who seek to undermine them."
Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the US Senate committee on foreign relations, criticized the shift sharply. "Congress appropriated money for the democracy fund on a bipartisan basis to support defenders of human rights, to assist victims of human rights violations and to promote the growth of democracy abroad," she said. "The Trump administration's proposals would use taxpayer funds to promote far-right organizations and programs in established democracies. This is a waste of resources and undermines United States values and relations with democratic partners, including allies in Europe." The grants also include $2 million for early-warning networks protecting Christians in Nigeria, $1 million for a journalism consortium to push back against designations of "trusted" media outlets, and funding to document what one award calls "democratic backsliding" in Europe tied to "mass and illegal migration."
The state department said the programs remain in "active deliberation" and that awardees would meet guidelines for federal grants, with all programming undergoing "standard and rigorous vetting process by grant professionals." Under the legislation authorizing the fund, money must be assigned by September 30, the end of the fiscal year, when unobligated funds typically lapse. The Guardian first reported that Trump officials had drawn up no-bid grants aimed at rightwing causes; ProPublica reported at least a dozen such grants. The full scope of the awards now shows how substantially the plan reshapes the fund's priorities and which grants have survived congressional scrutiny.
Citações Notáveis
Congress appropriated money for the democracy fund on a bipartisan basis to support defenders of human rights and promote the growth of democracy abroad. The Trump administration's proposals would use taxpayer funds to promote far-right organizations and programs in established democracies.— Jeanne Shaheen, top Democrat on the US Senate committee on foreign relations
The story for me is the high-level—including White House-directed—attention on these programs. These awards have been briefed at the highest levels of the department and have buy-in from the White House.— Person familiar with the grant discussions
Quer a matéria completa?
Leia o original em The Guardian ↗