On this episode, we discuss how nonprofits can engage in advocacy during this time of transition and prepare for 2025.

Attorneys for this episode

Sarah Efthymiou

Víctor Rivera Labiosa

Melissa Marichal Zayas

Show Notes

 

Post-Election Communications: Prohibition on Campaign Intervention

·       Keep in mind that 501(c)(3)s should never indicate that they support or oppose candidates for public office, whether in the past, present, or future.

• Permissible communications for 501(c)(3)s:
• Congratulating a newly elected official or thanking a former candidate for their hard work during the election.
• Discussing the organization’s nonpartisan voter engagement.
• Commenting on the demographics of who voted or didn’t vote.
• Encouraging a peaceful continuation or transfer of office.

·       Impermissible communications for 501(c)(3)s include:

o   Suggesting that the organization attempted to influence the outcome of an election.

o   Supporting efforts to draft a named person to run for office in a future election.

o   Declaring that the organization or voters will hold an elected official accountable in the next election.

 

Transition Advocacy: Is it Lobbying?

·       Transition advocacy is a hot topic, especially after elections, and one of the most common questions we get from 501(c)(3) public charities is whether it counts as lobbying. The short answer? Sometimes, yes—but often not.

·       In general, lobbying involves efforts to influence specific legislation. For 501(c)(3) organizations operating under the insubstantial part test, advocacy for or against legislation qualifies may count as lobbying.

·       If an organization has made the 501(h) election—which allows nonprofits to maximize and clarify their lobbying limits—the IRS uses a different definition. Under the 501(h) expenditure test, lobbying breaks down into two categories:

o   Direct lobbying: Speaking to a legislator and expressing a view about specific legislation.

o   Grassroots lobbying: Communicating with the general public to express a view on specific legislation andincluding a call to action.

·       Under the 501(h) expenditure test, two key factors determine whether your activity qualifies as direct lobbying:

o   Are you speaking to a legislator?

o   Is the topic you’re discussing considered specific legislation?

If the answer to both is “yes,” it likely counts as lobbying.

·       Examples of lobbying activities during transition period:

o   Advocating about spending priorities

o   Supporting/opposing nominations of new exec cabinet officials or judiciary

o   Advocating for changes in laws or amending current laws

o   Advocating for a new program – if would require new legislation

·       Important to assess what you’re saying, who you’re saying it to, and whether any exceptions apply.

 

Transition Advocacy: When is it Not Lobbying?

·       Some organizations may try to avoid engaging in lobbying activities so it’s important to understand what their non-lobbying options are during this transition

·       During this period, organizations can try to get to know their newly elected officials. Meeting with these officials, without trying to influence any nomination process or any piece of legislation (including the budget process), does not count as a lobbying activity.

·       On top of that, nonprofit organizations can do the following:

o   Recommend transition team members

o   Get involved in the executive order process

o   Develop relationships with these newly elected officials

o   Talk about nominations that do not require the advice and consent of a legislative body (or a legislative vote)

o   Actively participate in the rulemaking process

§  Beware: it may count as a lobbying activity at the state/local level

o   Take advantage of the 501(h) lobbying exceptions!

 

Resources

Can We Say That? Post-Election Advocacy for 501(c)(3) Organizations

Preparing for Change: How Nonprofits Can Shape Policy By Engaging Transition Teams

Transition Advocacy: Is it Lobbying?

The Advocacy Playbook Series

It’s the holiday season, and we here at the Rules of the Game podcast would like to embrace the opportunity to give thanks to several amazing nonprofits, who thrived in the face of adversity, boosted civic engagement, successfully led the charge on critical advocacy initiatives, and supported their communities in times of need. From North Carolina, to Colorado, to Missouri, and beyond, nonprofit advocates boldly stood up to protect democracy, defend our rights, and secure justice for all. So, as we gather around the table with family and friends this week, we want to celebrate them and their incredible contributions to our communities this year.

Natalie Ossenfort: Thank you to all of the amazing advocates who worked so diligently on ballot measures across the country to guarantee access to abortion, expand workers’ rights, and ensure the freedom to marry in state constitutions. By creating robust coalitions of nonprofit organizations with shared policy goals, these advocates secured several major wins. From a successful constitutional amendment in Arizona spearheaded by a group of nonprofits organized as “Arizona for Abortion Access” to the “Freedom to Marry” coalition in Colorado, nonprofits across the country organized for success this year and for the protection of our rights. We thank you for your amazing contributions.

Monika Graham: Thank you to the Innocence Project, a member of the Alliance for Justice, for their groundbreaking work in the pursuit of justice and advocacy on behalf of the wrongfully convicted. Thank you, in particular, for your advocacy on the Marcellus Williams case. To Mr. Williams: our hearts are with you and your loved ones. To the Innocence Project: Thank you.

Tim Mooney: Thank you for the resiliency of the nonprofit community in western North Carolina in the wake of Hurricane Helene. The North Carolina Rescue Collective delivered water, food, and supplies to local residents. Brother Wolf Animal Rescue also stepped up to ensure their animals were safe before the storm, and they continue their important work today despite extensive damage to their facilities.

Brittany Hacker: Thank you to In Our Own Voice National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda. The organization educates the public and advocates for reproductive justice, while lifting up the voices of black women. They also actively engage in critical voter education and GOTV activities.

Sarah Efthymiou: Thank you to the private and public foundations who support nonprofit advocacy efforts. In particular, the Gill Foundation funds charities that engage in LGBTQ+ advocacy to pave the way for a more inclusive future. In doing so, it empowers foundation grantees to tackle difficult policy challenges.

Susan Finkle-Sourlis: Thank you to the nonprofits that worked so hard this election to educate voters and get out the vote. Shout out to the Interfaith Alliance for their “The Vote is Sacred Bus Tour,” a nonpartisan effort to boost civic engagement across the country.

Victor Rivera: Thank you to the Health Forward Foundation, which endorsed Missouri’s “Yes on 3” campaign to end Missouri’s abortion ban and the Missourians for Healthy Families and Fair Wages campaign. Their advocacy led to the protection of abortion access in the state, raised the state’s minimum wage, and secured paid sick leave guarantees.

Melissa Marichal Zayas: Thank you to the Organization of Exonerees for your commitment to the fight for justice, your care for the recently freed, and for standing in solidarity with others who are still waiting for their voices to be heard.

 

The people voted on Tuesday for their choice of candidates and in many states they also voted on Ballot measures or ballot initiatives. Ballot measures offer voters a way to participate in direct democracy and can be a powerful tool for change. On this episode, we will discuss some of the ballot measures that were up for a vote in 2024 and the results. 

As regular listeners will know ballot measures, initiatives, propositions, or bond measures are lobbying. Although they are on the ballot, they are lobbying activity and voters are the lawmakers. Many nonprofits, both c3 public charities and c4 social welfare organizations participate in ballot measure advocacy within their lobbying limits.    

Today we are going to discuss what happened – what did voters decide when it came to the issues of choice, democracy, LGBTQ rights, and worker protections. We are traveling across this nation from ME to OH – to FL, then head west AZ and CA, CO, and HI, and finally NE, to learn what voters decided.   

Lawyers for this episode 

Sarah 

Melissa 

Susan 

Show notes 

LGBTQ Ballot Measures  

Thanks! I would like to start us off by lifting up a number of ballot measure victories in the LGBTQ space.  

We frequently talk about litigation as an impactful, non-lobbying, form of advocacy. In fact, we had a recent pod episode on that very topic. Well, there were several ballot measures that were introduced to get ahead of potential litigation – specifically cases that might threaten the right to marry. 

Here, I want to highlight how voters in CA, CO, and HI used their ballots to approve constitutional amendments that will enshrine the Freedom to Marry into their state constitutions.  

• Although the 2015 Obergefell decision has made state laws banning same sex marriage moot, lessons learned from the Dobbs decision overturning abortion rights; the proactive, legislatively referred measures are intended to safeguard their states’ freedom to marry if a conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court were to overturn existing protections 

• likely that these 3 ballot measures are the first in a wave of proactive measures to fend off (or respond to) any such attacks by a conservative-majority court 

 

 

Reproductive Rights Ballot Measures 

• Voters in seven states approved ballot measures to enshrine reproductive rights in their state constitutions, including in two states with abortion bans. 

• Missouri Amendment 3 establishes a constitutional right to reproductive freedom, which is defined as “the right to make and carry out decisions about all matters relating to reproductive health care,” including but not limited to childbirth, birth control, and abortion care. The amendment also provides that the state may only enact laws regulating abortion after the point of fetal viability.  

• Similar abortion rights measures failed in Florida, South Dakota, and Nebraska. 57% of Floridian voters supported their state’s right to abortion measure, but Florida requires at least 60% of voters to support a constitutional amendment for it to succeed, which is a uniquely high bar. 

• Arizona Proposition 139 amends the state constitution to guarantee a right to abortion and prohibits the state from restricting this right before fetal viability.  

• San Francisco Proposition O establishes several local requirements that help to protect access to abortion and other forms of reproductive health care.  

• Amarillo, Texas Proposition A, a so-called “abortion travel ban” initiative, was rejected by the city’s voters. Local businesses, organizations, and residents formed the Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance to oppose the measure and protect reproductive freedom in the Texas Panhandle.  

 

Thanks Melissa, I can. In many states there were issues on the ballot that concerned democracy and constitutional rights.  

First stop – Ohio, Issue 1, its aim was to create a 15 member redistricting commission, made up of citizens across the political parties and ensuring representation from different areas of the state.  

Unfortunately this initiative failed. There was a lot of confusion surrounding this ballot measure. Many believed that the ballot language, which the Republican controlled ballot board wrote – was misleading and biased. Conservatives in the state are opposed to redistricting reform.  

The campaign for Issue 1, called Citizens not Politicians, took the issue to State supreme court, which sided with the Ballot board. The actual proposal by Citizens not Politicians was to ban partisan gerrymandering  – and the ballot board’s language stated it would require gerrymandering.  

So much so that Both sides, pro and con – were using the same slogan to get out the vote. I was in Ohio, my home state, before the election and I saw yard signs that said – stop gerrymandering by voting yes and I saw signs that said – stop gerrymandering by voting no.  

Let’s go to Arizona where voters defeated three measures that would have taken away their voice in the democratic process. One on the election of judges and two on the ballot initiative process.  

First, voters weighed in on Proposition 137. This Ballot measure concerned the election of state court judges, a yes vote would end term limits for judges. A judge would have a permanent appointment until age 70.  judges permanent appointments. Currently, State supreme court justices are limited to six-year terms and superior court judges are subject to 4 year terms. They must run for reelection. This proposition was rejected by voters – they voted to keep term limits for their justices. So, these judges will be accountable to voters when they run for reelection.    

Prop 134, which would changed the signature requirement in order for a measure to qualify for the ballot.  It would essentially make it more difficult. Currently, the Arizona state constitution requires 15% of the number of voters in the last election. So if 1 million people voted in the last governors race, a ballot measure would need at least 150,000 signatures in order to qualify. There is no restrictions or requirements on where in the state the signer lives.  

Prop 134 would made it more difficult by requiring so many signatures to come from each legislative district in the state.  

Prop 136 – would have allowed opponents to a ballot measure to challenge any ballot measure before it went to the voters. Opponents could have engaged in costly legal battles, perhaps killing it before voters even got a chance to decide.  

Fortunately, both these measures were rejected by the voters.  

 

Did you know that slavery in some form is still part of some state constitutions?  

Both California and Nevada proposed ballot measures to remove language in their state constitutions permitting involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime. Voters in Nevada passed Question 4, joining eight other states that have passed ballot measures to abolish slavery in prisons in recent years.  

A similar proposal in California, Proposition 6, at the time of this recording has not yet been called. If it passes, it would prohibit prisons from punishing incarcerated people through involuntary servitude.   

Lastly in Maine Question 5 – asked the question should Maine change its current state flag back to an historical version known as the Pine Tree flag, a simple pine tree with one star in the corner.  Voters said no.  

 

 

Finally, we’d be remiss if we didn’t mention the ballot measure victory in Nebraska that will provide workers with paid sick leave. 

• NE voters overwhelmingly passed Initiative 436, which will require employers to provide 1 hour of paid sick leave for every hour worked 

• According to the initiative’s campaign, over 250K Nebraskans currently lack paid sick leave. More than 1/3 full time and more than ¾ part-time employees 

• Initiative was supported by business community – recognizing that providing paid sick leave increases productivity, recruitment and lowers turnover 

• Example of organizations that supports workers’ rights joining forces with members of the business community to effect positive policy change 

• Important to note here that Nebraska was joined by voters in Alaska and Missouri (all traditionally solid Republican states) in passing these progressive pro-worker policies. 

 

This is proof that there are so many issues, legislative ideas and progress that can be made through initiative process, from equality to repro rights to democracy to flag choice.  

Reminders and Resources  

• Ballot measure advocacy is a great way to support your organization’s mission by educating the public on the issues, building coalitions with other community groups, and making change.  

• The IRS considers supporting or opposing ballot measures a form of lobbying. Most states and some localities regulate ballot measure activities under their campaign finance law. Campaign finance rules may require registration and/or reporting if certain triggers or thresholds are met. 

We have several ballot measure resources you can check out at afj.org, including our full-length guide, Seize the Initiative, and a number of state-specific resources, too. We also have resources to help you navigate the laws related to other forms of advocacy, such as post-election and transition advocacy, and assess your advocacy capacity as you make your action plan for next year. Check out our recently released advocacy playbook series for more information about the many types of c3-safe advocacy and examples that are specifically tailored for different issues.  

Resources 

Seize the Initiative: A Legal Guide on Ballot Measures for Nonprofits and Foundations 

Episode 58: Ballot Measures Revisited 

The Advocacy Playbook Series 

Can We Say That? Post-Election Advocacy for 501(c)(3) Organizations  

Preparing for Change: How Nonprofits Can Shape Policy By Engaging Transition Teams 

The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center Ballot Measure Hub 

 

On today’s episode, we dive into rules surrounding partisan activities for employees of 501(c)(3) organizations. With the election just around the corner, we will give you some best practices for how to keep your 501(c)(3) safe from any partisan activity while you engage in electoral work as an individual.  

 

 

Attorneys for this Episode

Melissa Marichal Zayas 

Brittany Hacker 

Victor Rivera Labiosa 

 

Shownotes 

Rules for 501(c)(3) organizations  

• Remain nonpartisan when acting on behalf of your 501(c)(3) 

• Consider engaging in nonpartisan voter education and election protection activity 

• Best practice: Internal election season policy 

Individual rules for 501(c)(3) employees, board members, and volunteers 

• Make clear what hat you are wearing 

• Avoid using org resources (email, printer, laptop, staff time)  

• Watch your social media activity 

Scenarios 

• Supporting others running for office 

• Canvasing, phone banks, rallies 

• Online activity and social media accounts  

• Employees running for office 

 

Resources 

• Election Checklist for 501(c)(3) Public Charities: Ensuring Election Year Advocacy Efforts Remain Nonpartisan 

• Practical Guidance: Nonprofit Voter Assistance series 

• Sample 501(c)(3) Organizational Policy for Election Season 

• Board Members and Election Year Activities  

• 501(c)(3) Employees Running for Office 

• Election Activities for Individuals Associated with 501(c)(3)s  

• FAQ: Influencing Public Policy in the Digital Age 

Election season is well underway and politics is everywhere. It’s one of  our busiest time at Bolder Advocacy. On this episode, we bring you three of your questions to answer on the pod… it’s another round of Ask Us Anything, Electionpalooza Edition!

 

Lawyers for this episode

Tim Mooney

Susan Finkle Sourlis

Monika Graham

 

Shownotes

– Question: Presidential campaigns working with outside groups on door-to-door canvassing for their get-out-the-vote efforts— is this illegal coordination under federal election law? – Answer:    – Base coordination rules    – Exception to coordination rule: FEC AO 2024-01 states that scripts and canvassing literature are NOT public communications, and therefore consulting with candidates and parties is not illegal coordination.    – Both presidential campaigns are doing this, with one reportedly relying on it more than the other.    – This practice is likely happening in many federal races (Senate and House).    – Important: This is NOT available for 501(c)(3)s or for state/local candidates

– Question: Can 501(c)(3) organizations comment on candidates or political parties in the context of an election? – Answer:    – Yes, but tread carefully.    – 501(c)(3) organizations must remain nonpartisan.    – Comments should have an independent, nonpartisan, non-election-related reason.    – Focus on the issue, not the candidate (e.g., correcting factual errors without discussing the candidate’s attributes).    – Before responding, consider:      1. Decide who speaks on behalf of the organization.      2. Script responses to stay on message and avoid crossing any lines.      3. Avoid discussing qualifications or endorsing/opposing candidates.    – Example: Instead of “Voters should reject this misinformation,” say “Americans won’t stand for misinformation on public health issues.”    – Criticizing or praising incumbents is less risky, but avoid implying support or opposition for re-election.

– Question: Can nonprofit staff support candidates and express their opinion? – Answer:    – Individuals have the right to participate and voice their own opinions when acting in their individual capacity.    – 501(c)(3) organizations must remain nonpartisan. This applies to staff, board members, and volunteers when acting on behalf of the organization.    – In official organizational events, staff should not engage in partisan activities (e.g., wearing a pro-candidate t-shirt).    – In their personal time, employees can:      – Participate in partisan election activity at home, online, or at rallies.      – Use their own resources (email, social media) and must act outside work hours.      – Put up lawn signs but not use them as Zoom backgrounds for organizational calls.      – Canvas for candidates on the weekends but not encourage others during the workweek.    – Every nonprofit needs a policy outlining the prohibition of using organizational resources for political activities.    – Alliance for Justice has an example of such a policy.

 

Resources

Trister Ross memo on canvassing and coordination

Election Activities of Individuals Associated With 501(c)(3) Organizations

 

With only a small handful of weeks remaining until the general election, you may be wondering about how you or your nonprofit can get involved in voter assistance activities such as providing rides to the polls, registering voters, and helping voters vote by mail. Would you be surprised that these activities are often regulated by both state and federal law? On this episode, we’ll discuss our Practical Guidance Voter Assistance resources series, created in partnership with Democracy Capacity Project, and explain some of the rules you should be thinking about in the final countdown to the big day.

 

Attorneys for this episode:

Tim Mooney

Natalie Ossenfort

Victor Rivera

 

General Overview of Relevant Law

·      When engaging in any election-related activities there are several areas of law that your nonprofit should think about:

o   Internal Revenue Code: explains the types of activities your nonprofit is allowed to engage in accordance with the tax code

§  501(c)(3)s: Keep it nonpartisan. No support or opposition of candidates. Allowed to engage in campaigns for or against ballot initiatives, constitutional amendments, bond measures, city charter amendments. Just remember that this activity may count as lobbying at the federal level.

§  501(c)(4)s; (c)(5)s, (c)(6)s: Partisan political activities as secondary activities of org

§  PACs: Regulated by Section 527 of tax code. Partisan political work as focus, but different types of PACs may be restricted in terms of whether they can engage in coordinated vs. independent expenditures

o   Other federal laws, including the Federal Election Campaign Act: always going to be relevant in elections with federal candidates on the ballot

§  Provisional ballots available  even if they aren’t under state election laws (i.e. can vote provisionally for POTUS if there’s a dispute as to registration status and resolve that later)

§  Accessible ballots required under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).

§  Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) requires states to provide absentee ballots for military personnel, their families, and U.S. citizens overseas in federal elections.

§  Voting Rights Act (VRA)

·      requires jurisdictions with significant populations of non-English-speaking citizens to provide bilingual election materials and assistance, ensuring all voters can understand and participate in the process.

·      allows observers from the Department of Justice or the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to monitor elections to ensure compliance with voting rights laws, especially in areas with a history of discrimination.

o   State law: Often regulates

§  Who, when, how you can register voters

§  Who is eligible to vote-by-mail (and when)

§  Line-warming activities designed to encourage voters to stay in line

§  Rules for poll watchers

§  Voter ID required in some states

§  And more!

 

Practical Guidance Voter Assistance Series

o   Focuses on state law, but also includes some federal law tips throughout

o   (Questions answered include:

o   How can our organization help people vote by mail?

o   Can we help with a rides to the polls program?

o   How can we help voters already at the polls?

o   When might our work also trigger campaign finance laws?

o   Can we advocate for a new polling place?

o   Current states:

o   Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin

o   Texas line-warming example

o   Reminder that many states don’t have polling places (in traditional sense) since they’ve shifted focus to vote-by-mail.

Resources:

·      Practical Guidance Voter Assistance Series: https://afj.org/bolder-advocacy/practical-guidance-nonprofit-voter-assistance-series/

·      Rules of the Game: Guide to Election-Related Activities for 501(c)(3)s: https://afj.org/resource/the-rules-of-the-game-a-guide-to-election-related-activities-for-501c3-organizations/

·      The Connection: https://afj.org/resource/the-connection-strategies-for-creating-and-operating-501c3s-501c4s-and-political-organizations/

 This is a special rebroadcast of our episode on election protection and nonpartisan voter assistance from 2022. Since the original airing, Bolder Advocacy, in partnership with The Democracy Capacity Project, has expanded our series of state law guides on nonprofit voter assistance. Most states are covered and you can find them on our resource library page. We’ll be back in two weeks with a brand new episode.

—

On this episode, we’ll discuss how different types of tax-exempt organizations can ensure the right to vote is protected by engaging in election protection activities and assistingvoters at the polls. and potentially afterwards. Whether it’s poll monitoring, ballot curing, staffing an election protection hotline, or providing rides to the polls, we’ll discuss the rules that apply to 501(c)(3)s and 501(c)(4)s so that your organization can ensure that all eligible voices are heard this election season. 

Attorneys for this episode  

• Tim Mooney  
• Natalie Ossenfort 
• Quyen Tu 

Shownotes 

• Poll watching / observing 
• Litigation 
• Rides to Polls 
• Ballot chasing and curing 
• Poll monitoring 
• Count monitoring 
• Voting education 
• Nonpartisan activity
  • No support or opposition of candidates
  • Facts and Circumstances
  • Follow FEC rules if federal candidates on ballots (no incentives for voting or registering to vote) 
• State law often adds layers of complexity here – be sure to know what is allowed in your state
  • Ohio: must stay outside 100ft no-solicitation permitter when line warming
  • Michigan: strict rules related to hiring a car to provide rides to the polls (effectively prohibited unless voter unable to walk)
  • CO / TX: strict rules that apply when you want to hand out and collect voter registration applications
• Voter Assistance Series (AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, IL, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, NY, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, TX, Virginia, Wisconsin)
  • Voter Registration Rules
  • Vote by Mail Rules
  • Correcting errors on absentee ballots (ballot curing)
  • Rides to Polls Rules
  • Line Warming Activities  
  • Poll Watching
  • What about selfies? 
• Partisan Voter Protection
  • Ballot Chasing and Curing can be done with a partisan focus (for instance, only trying to cure votes of one party, litigating on behalf of a candidate)  
  • Off limits for c3s, which must engage in nonpartisan advocacy ONLY 
  • Ok for c4s but counts as secondary activity 

Resources Practical Guidance – Voter Assistance Series, released in partnership with the Democracy Capacity Project  Rules of the Game – Guide to Election Related Activities for 501(c)(3)s  Election Checklist for 501(c)(3)s Combating Voter Suppression & Election Subversion

As AI continues to advance, its potential to influence elections and democracy, both positively and negatively, has become a critical issue. In this episode, we delve into the rapidly evolving intersection of artificial intelligence and election disinformation with Jonathan Mehta Stein where he discusses how AI, particularly generative AI, can be used to create deepfakes and other misleading content that could destabilize elections, deceive voters, and potentially alter election outcomes. We also explore how nonprofits and community organizations can play a crucial role in combating this emerging threat.

 

Attorneys for this episode

 Quyen Tu, Melissa Marichal Zayas

 

Guest: Jonathan Mehta Stein, Executive Director of California Common Cause and the California Initiative for Technology and Democracy (CITED)

 

1. Introduction to AI and Election Disinformation:

   – Jonathan Mehta Stein introduces the concept of AI and its implications for democracy.

   – Overview of CITED (California Initiative for Technology and Democracy) and its mission to protect democracy from AI-powered disinformation.

 

2. Understanding AI and Generative AI:

   – Explanation of artificial intelligence, generative AI, and their applications in everyday life.

   – Discussion of the potential dangers of AI when it comes to sensitive areas like crime prediction and loan approvals.

 

3. Deepfakes and Their Impact on Elections:

   – Definition and examples of deepfakes—AI-generated videos or audio that portray people doing or saying things they never did.

   – The global rise of deepfakes in elections, with examples from Taiwan, Slovakia, and the United States.

 

4. Local Elections and the Threat of Deepfakes:

   – Jonathan shares concerns about deepfakes being used at the local level, where they may go unnoticed and could significantly impact election outcomes.

   – The particular risks faced by communities of color, immigrant communities, and non-English speakers.

 

5. What Can Nonprofits and Community Members Do?

   – Practical steps for verifying information and combating disinformation in your community.

   – The importance of being a trusted messenger and educating your community about digital threats.

 

6. The Role of Tech Companies:

   – How major tech companies are responding (or not) to the challenges posed by AI and disinformation.

   – Discussion on the first U.S. presidential election where AI is playing a significant role.

 

7. Policy Solutions and Legislative Efforts:

   – Overview of the legislation being proposed to regulate AI and disinformation in the election context.

   – CITED’s policy framework for requiring digital watermarks and labeling AI-generated content.

 

8. Parting Thoughts:

   – Jonathan’s optimism about the nonprofit sector’s ability to rise to this new challenge, and the urgency of addressing these threats in the short term.

 

Resources

 

– www.cited.tech

– AI Threats in the Election

– Commenting on Candidates in Campaigns

– UC Berkeley IGS Poll on Digital Threats

As we’ve talked about on previous editions of the pod, advocacy includes a wide array of different options to help change things for the better in our communities. One of the more important, but less discussed methods, is litigation. On this episode, we dive into the role litigation plays in nonprofit advocacy, its treatment under the law, and things to think about if your nonprofit is looking to use this tool for good.

 

Lawyers for this episode

Natalie Ossenfort

Tim Mooney

Quyen Tu

 

• Litigation as an advocacy tool (citizen suits, appeals, amicus briefs etc.)
• Treatment under tax law
• Relation to charitable purpose
• Not lobbying under 501(h) or insubstantial part definitions
• Not limited by IRS / Tax Code

• Spectrum of engagement
  • Example: Letter of Support signed by over 225 organizations in support of the Fearless Foundation (currently under legal attack for a program that supports the funding of black female entrepreneurs)
  • Example: In 2018, Alliance for Justice and Council on Foundations filed a joint amicus brief in the case of Parks Foundation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue arguing for a narrow interpretation of what it means to “express a view on specific legislation” when determining whether a nonprofit’s activities constitute lobbying.
  • Example: Lambda Legal focuses on litigation in support of LGBTQ+ rights and individuals living with HIV/AIDS. They represent clients in cases involving discrimination, marriage equality, and transgender rights, participating in all stages of litigation. Currently representing AFJ member PFLAG in a Texas case.
  • Example: Clean Water Act citizen suits suing polluters for discharges without a permit – we’ll talk more about this specifically later
  • Standing: must show harm to the organization or members of the organization
• Publicly supporting (or opposing) another organization’s litigation
• Amicus briefs
• Representing clients
• Litigating as a plaintiff (citizen suits, standing)

• Things to think about
• The law (who are the experts in relevant area of law?)
• The courts (judges matter!) – For more check out AFJ’s federal and state court resources on our website.
• Capacity (internal or external)
• Staff and resources (funding and time)
• Reputation with funders, members, public
• In-house or outside counsel
• Media impact and PR
• Insurance (not sure if this is too deep in the weeds?)

• Examples
  • Lawsuits typically target government agencies, industrial polluters, and corporations to enforce existing environmental laws
  • Clean Water, Clean Air Act, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Endangered Species Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Safe Drinking Water Act
  • Litigates claims of actual innocence made by individuals convicted of serious crimes in Texas.
  • Example: Former client, Johnny Pinchback, wrongfully convicted of sexual assault of two teenage girls in Dallas (proven innocent via DIA testing) and formally exonerated via post-conviction habeas corpus litigation
  • Stories of clients like Johnny led to increased public awareness of wrongful convictions and even legislative reforms
• Earthjustice (AFJ member) + Waterkeeper Alliance
• Legal Services Corporation & regional public interest law; Legal Aid at Work, Legal Aid Association of CA, CA Women’s Law Center, Tzedek
• Innocence Project of Texas (member of Innocence Network, which is also home to AFJ Member, Innocence Project)

• Resources
• Issue Advocacy: Why Courts Matter
• State Courts Hub
• AFJ Database of reports on federal judges and judicial nominees

In this episode of the podcast, we explore the importance of student advocacy and voting. Additionally, we discuss how 501(c)(3) organizations can engage in advocacy efforts during election season. Joining us today is Ally, our Bolder Advocacy legal intern, to answer questions about the impact of student advocacy on campus. 

 

Hosts:

Susan Finkle Sourlis (Attorney)

Monika Graham (Attorney)

Alexandra Roseberry (Intern)

1. On-Campus Advocacy Culture
   • On-Campus Activities 
   • Voter Laws and Students
   • Getting Involved With Advocacy as a Student
2. How Nonprofits Can Participate in Nonpartisan Voting Education
   • Voter Registration Programs
   • Encouraging Voting
   • Polling Information
3. How 501(c)(3)s Can Engage During Election Season
   • Issue Advocacy 
   • Candidate Education
   • Voter Education
   • Voter Engagement
   • Ballot Measures
   • Private Foundations
4. Student Organizations and Youth Groups 
   • Rhizome
   • Youth on Root

Resources:

• Rules of the Game – https://afj.org/resource/the-rules-of-the-game-a-guide-to-election-related-activities-for-501c3-organizations/
• Our guidelines for most of the 50 states on voter outreach and voter registration activities – https://afj.org/bolder-advocacy/practical-guidance-nonprofit-voter-assistance-series/
• Project Grant Rule
• ACLU KYR  –  https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights
• https://www.nonprofitvote.org/get-registered-to-vote/ 
• https://www.lawyerscommittee.org/ 
• Rhizome – https://www.werhize.org/
• Youth on Root – https://www.youthonroot.org/