Trump Calls for RICO Charges Against George Soros Over Support for Protests
Former President Donald Trump has escalated his criticism of billionaire philanthropist George Soros, calling for federal racketeering charges against him and his son. In a fiery statement posted Wednesday, Trump alleged that Soros and his network are financially backing violent protests across the United States. The accusation drew an immediate denial from Soros’s philanthropic organization, which labeled the charges as false and unfounded.
Trump’s Accusation
Trump’s remarks targeted both George Soros and his son, Alex Soros, who has increasingly taken the lead in overseeing the family’s philanthropic network. “George Soros, and his wonderful radical left son, should be charged with RICO because of their support of violent protests, and much more, all throughout the United States of America,” Trump declared. He accused the Soros network of undermining national stability, warning that their influence had spread particularly across the West Coast.
The former president linked Soros’s financial contributions to nationwide unrest, framing the family as central actors in what he described as “damage” to the country. “Be careful, we’re watching you!” he concluded, emphasizing a rhetoric that combines legal threats with political messaging.
Open Society Foundations Denies Allegations
In response, the Open Society Foundations — the philanthropic organization founded by Soros — firmly rejected Trump’s claims. A spokesperson underscored that the organization does not provide financial support for violent demonstrations, reaffirming its mission as centered on advancing human rights, justice, and democratic freedoms.
“The Open Society Foundations support individuals’ right to engage in free speech, express political beliefs, and participate in nonviolent public protests,” the statement read. The foundation emphasized that grantees must comply with U.S. law, and that violence is inconsistent with its values.
This pushback reflects a long-standing disagreement between Soros’s network and conservative critics who argue his funding indirectly fuels unrest. The Open Society Foundations, however, points to decades of work in global democracy promotion, funding civil society organizations and legal advocacy groups in dozens of countries.
Understanding the RICO Act
Trump’s call for RICO charges is notable given the history of the statute. The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), signed into law in 1970, was designed to combat organized crime syndicates, particularly focusing on the Mafia. Over time, prosecutors have extended its use to cases ranging from political corruption to white-collar crime.
Calling for RICO charges in the context of philanthropic activity represents an atypical application. Legal experts note that the statute requires proof of an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in patterns of racketeering activity — a high bar when applied to nonprofit or political funding structures. Previous attempts to invoke RICO laws against ideological opponents, including climate activists and political donors, have seen little success in U.S. courts.
Historical Context of Soros as a Political Target
George Soros has been one of the most polarizing figures in modern politics. Born in Hungary and surviving Nazi occupation, Soros immigrated to the United States and built a fortune as an investor. Since the 1980s, his philanthropic initiatives have funneled billions into global projects promoting democracy, independent media, education, and judicial reform.
In the American political landscape, Soros has long been central to conservative criticism. For decades, right-leaning politicians and commentators have depicted him as a shadowy financier of progressive causes, charging that his donations shape prosecutorial races, criminal justice reform initiatives, and movements advocating expanded voting rights.
While his supporters describe him as a defender of open societies and democratic resilience, detractors argue his financial reach exerts an outsized influence on policymaking and activism. The decision to transition control of much of his foundation’s work to his son, Alex Soros, has only heightened scrutiny, as Alex publicly embraces continuity of his father’s mission.
Economic and Political Impact of the Allegations
Trump’s renewed targeting of Soros has implications beyond rhetoric. First, it amplifies a political narrative centered on law and order, echoing strategies deployed in his 2016 presidential campaign and clawed back during his rallies ahead of the 2020 and 2024 races. By invoking the imagery of violence and chaos in U.S. cities, Trump aims to link unrest with Democratic tolerance for progressive activism.
Economically, the allegations may also ripple through nonprofit fundraising and philanthropic networks. Soros’s foundations distribute billions of dollars to local advocacy groups, legal aid organizations, and minority-led civil society efforts. Casting these grants in the frame of criminality risks stigmatizing grassroots recipients, potentially chilling participation in civic engagement initiatives.
At the same time, renewed scrutiny on the use of political donations raises questions about the broader balance of money in U.S. politics. While Soros is one of the most visible donors on the left, his influence is countered by conservative megadonors funding right-leaning candidates and think tanks. The confrontation highlights how billionaire-driven philanthropy continues to shape public discourse.
Regional Comparisons: U.S. vs. International Treatment of Protest Funding
Accusations against Soros must also be viewed in the context of global debates about protest movements. In countries such as Russia and Hungary, Soros-backed organizations have been expelled or heavily restricted after governments accused them of fueling dissent. Critics argue these restrictions target civil society, while defenders portray them as necessary to protect sovereignty.
In contrast, the United States traditionally protects freedom of speech and assembly under the Constitution, giving broad leeway to organizations funding nonviolent public engagement. Courts have largely distinguished lawful political funding from direct involvement in riots or criminal disturbance. For this reason, Trump’s call for RICO charges represents a stark divergence from conventional interpretations of both free speech rights and nonprofit activity.
Public Reaction and Political Climate
The U.S. public remains divided on Trump’s remarks. Among his supporters, the call to investigate Soros resonates strongly, feeding into long-standing beliefs that the billionaire bankrolls progressive unrest. Conservative pundits and social media voices amplified Trump’s statement, framing it as a demand for accountability.
Progressive organizations, meanwhile, argue that the effort to criminalize philanthropic support for civic engagement is a direct threat to democratic norms. Advocates caution that targeting Soros in this manner risks delegitimizing legitimate protest movements, particularly those focused on racial justice, reproductive rights, and environmental advocacy.
Independent voters, who will play a significant role in the 2026 midterm elections, may interpret the development differently. While some view Trump’s comments as a warning about political extremism, others question whether invoking criminal statutes against political opponents undermines democratic resilience.
Looking Ahead
Trump’s demand for RICO charges against Soros highlights not just a clash of personalities but also the broader contest over how protest, wealth, and political influence intersect in American democracy. With midterm elections ahead, the rhetoric underscores how law-and-order messaging remains a centerpiece of Trump’s strategy to consolidate support.
Whether federal authorities will entertain such charges remains highly uncertain. Historically, similar accusations have not yielded prosecutions under racketeering laws, suggesting the call may be more symbolic than legal. Still, the public debate may reshape how Americans perceive the relationship between wealth, activism, and responsibility for civil unrest.
As the contest over control of U.S. political narratives intensifies, the figure of George Soros — now in his mid-90s and increasingly succeeded by his son — remains a lightning rod for partisan battles. His foundation’s work, lauded internationally for promoting democratic practices, continues to be cast at home as a point of contention in a wider struggle over America’s future.
In a climate where philanthropy, protest movements, and politics collide, Trump’s latest statement ensures that the Soros name will remain firmly embedded in the national conversation as the country approaches another pivotal election cycle.