By Democrats always claim to hate “dark money” in politics, but when you scratch the surface, it’s clear that they are the main beneficiaries of the practice, taking millions to fund leftwing projects. Now, new research reveals that as they’ve not been able to convince the public to come on board with “green” policies, the left has resorted to using the funds of a billionaire to conduct lawfare to get their way.
A prominent San Francisco–based law firm leading a nationwide wave of climate lawsuits against major energy producers has received tens of millions of dollars in funding from progressive nonprofit networks, according to tax filings reviewed in recent reporting—financing that operates independently of courtroom outcomes.
Sher Edling LLP has brought more than two dozen lawsuits on behalf of states and municipalities including Minnesota, Hawaii, Baltimore, and New York. The firm characterizes the cases as “climate damage and deception” litigation designed to “hold fossil fuel industry defendants accountable for their decades-long campaigns of deception about the science of climate change and the role their products play in causing it, as well as their failure to take steps to avoid the harm they knew would arise from the use of their products or even to warn anyone about it.”
According to an investigation by The National Review, financial disclosures show that since 2017, Sher Edling has received close to $20 million from progressive-aligned nonprofits, including the Tides Foundation and the New Venture Fund. In 2024 alone, the firm reported receiving $314,000 from the Tides Foundation, a grant-making organization that has itself received significant support from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.
The Tides Foundation has funded a range of left-leaning organizations, including Black Feminist Future, Planned Parenthood affiliates, and the Council on American Islamic Relations—an organization recently designated a terrorist group by the governors of Texas and Florida.
That same year, the New Venture Fund provided nearly $2.5 million to Sher Edling. The organization, which states that it aims to build “an equitable world,” supports initiatives such as the Climate Justice Resilience Fund, which assists women, youth, and indigenous communities affected by climate issues. Since 2021, the New Venture Fund has contributed approximately $11 million to the firm.
Founded in 2016, Sher Edling has pursued at least 25 climate-related lawsuits. To date, none have resulted in final victories. On its website, the firm states: “Our work arises out of our conviction that the courts provide an even playing field essential to taking on the biggest polluters. They should not be allowed to make everyone else pay for the damage caused by their pollution.”
The funding structure and litigation strategy have drawn scrutiny from federal lawmakers. In 2023, Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. James Comer sent a letter raising concerns about the firm’s financing model. “It appears that Sher Edling is not really working on these lawsuits on a contingency basis, but rather the lawsuits are being funded, tax-free, by wealthy liberals via dark money pass-through funds,” the lawmakers wrote. “And as these groups showered Sher Edling with millions of dollars, your law firm advanced numerous climate change lawsuits. It therefore appears that dark money — a purported concern of many who support radical climate legislation — is fueling your firm’s litigious effort to achieve a left-wing goal lacking majority support in Congress: the eradication of fossil fuels.”
One of the firm’s most notable cases began in 2020, when it represented Maui County, Hawaii, in litigation against companies including ExxonMobil, Shell, and Sunoco. The lawsuit alleges the companies knew of climate-related risks but “have nevertheless engaged in a coordinated, multifront effort to conceal and deny their own knowledge of those threats.”
The filing seeks to shift financial responsibility from local governments to energy producers, stating: “The County seeks to ensure that the parties who have profited from externalizing the consequences and costs of dealing with global warming and its physical, environmental, social, and economic consequences, bear the costs of those impacts on the County, rather than the County, taxpayers, residents, or broader segments of the public.”
Legal scholars say the lawsuits reflect a broader strategy to impose climate-related costs through the courts when legislative avenues stall. Constitutional law professor John Yoo has described such efforts as attempts by local governments to pursue policy objectives outside the traditional democratic process—an approach critics warn could ultimately translate into higher energy costs for consumers nationwide.
The Tides Foundation and other Soros groups have long been funding what’s been labeled as fake protests. Over the summer, for example, unrest in Washington called attention to the role of the left’s paid protest infrastructure, with firms specializing in manufactured demonstrations reporting a sharp surge in demand following President Trump’s move to federalize control of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. Adam Swart, CEO of Crowds on Demand, said that requests for Washington-based protests jumped roughly 400 percent compared with the same period last year—an increase he said is typical during “high-stakes political moments.” Many of the requests, Swart noted, were aimed at opposing Trump’s actions and highlighting “government overreach,” even as he conceded failures by city leadership. “D.C.’s local government has been an abject failure in keeping citizens safe,” Swart said, “but there’s also a real danger in putting too much power in federal hands. That balance of power matters.”
Swart also acknowledged that modern protest crowds are often less organic than they appear. “Most people don’t know this, but many protesters are literally on the payroll—Capitol Hill staffers from both parties are often expected to show up at rallies and protests on their own time. That doesn’t mean they don’t support the cause, but these crowds aren’t as ‘organic’ as they appear on TV.” His firm openly advertises such services, stating: “Whether your organization is lobbying to move forward a healthcare, financial, energy or other social initiative, we can organize rallies and get media attention for your causes and candidates.”
Progressive groups have moved quickly to finance these efforts, with watchdog group Americans for Public Trust reporting that organizations backed by George Soros and allied donor networks have poured tens of millions of dollars into protest activity opposing Trump’s crackdown—underscoring how money, not mass sentiment alone, is increasingly shaping the optics of public dissent.
[Read More: DC Police Chief Melts Down In Crazed Rant]
