Recent disclosures by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have exposed systemic fraud and abuse within the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), with billions of taxpayer dollars going to shady nonprofits for spurious foreign projects each year. 

A particularly troubling aspect of these revelations involves the funding of organizations tied to Soros family’s Open Society Foundations (OSF). These groups, specifically the OSF-funded Tides network, engaged in so-called “transformative justice,” and have received significant financial support from USAID under the pretense of promoting democracy and legal reform abroad. 

However, evidence suggests that their efforts extend beyond international initiatives, influencing radical prosecutorial movements within the United States. The DOGE investigations may finally show some of the parallels between Soros-affiliated operations using nonprofits to aid his political allies abroad, and how the rise of Soros-backed prosecutors in major American cities, like Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, proves that this formula has been used domestically.

Funding Radical Transformative Justice Initiatives

USAID has long been a key instrument of American foreign aid, ostensibly committed to humanitarian assistance, economic development, and the promotion of democratic institutions. However, recent DOGE investigations reveal that USAID funds have been directed toward organizations affiliated with unaccountable nongovernmental organizations to pursue aggressive regime change strategies abroad, through aggressive media campaigns designed at spurring “lawfare” designed to undermine existing legal frameworks and establish alternative justice models. These groups claim to champion human rights and judicial independence but have been accused of using legal systems to advance radical ideological agendas.

“Transformative justice” is a concept rooted in progressive academia and critical legal studies, and seeks to dismantle traditional legal structures and replace them with systems that prioritize social equity over constitutional due process. Under this framework, progressives seek to shift accountability mechanisms from individual responsibility to collective societal transformation, hence the use of “equity” in Democratic talking points over “equality.” 

While proponents argue that transformative justice creates fairer legal outcomes, critics contend that it erodes foundational legal principles, fosters legal instability, and enables corruption under the guise of judicial reform.

The Foreign Influence Model: Lawfare and Destabilization

Soros-funded groups are among those receiving USAID money to operate in countries experiencing political transitions or instability. Their legal activism often targets governments that resist progressive political overhauls, using international human rights law and strategic litigation to force compliance with radical judicial reforms. In some cases, these initiatives have led to the weaponization of legal systems against political opponents, the erosion of national sovereignty, and the empowerment of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) with agendas often at odds with the host nation’s democratic processes.

One prominent example is the use of lawfare in Eastern European and Latin American countries, where Soros-backed organizations have lobbied for judicial reforms that weaken traditional prosecutorial discretion and prioritize social justice over punitive measures. These initiatives often align with broader geopolitical efforts to redefine legal norms in ways that diminish state authority and enhance transnational judicial influence.

The Domestic Parallels: Krasner and other Soros-Funded Prosecutors in the US

The strategies employed abroad under the guise of transformative justice have found their way into the American legal system, particularly through the election and empowerment of district attorneys who share similar ideological objectives. George and Alexander Soros and his affiliated organizations have invested millions in local prosecutorial races, supporting candidates who advocate for decriminalization, reduced sentencing, and non-traditional justice mechanisms.

Larry Krasner, the Philadelphia District Attorney, serves as a prime example of this phenomenon. A former defense attorney with a history of suing the police he now claims to partner with, Krasner was elected with substantial financial backing from Soros-aligned PACs. Since taking office, he has implemented policies that mirror the transformative justice initiatives funded abroad by USAID. This includes Krasner’s significant reduction in the prosecution of drug, theft, auto, and prostitution crimes, arguing that the traditional legal system disproportionately punishes “marginalized communities”. 

At the same time, his office has eliminated cash bail for many offenses, allowing repeat offenders to return to the streets without pre-trial detention. Therefore, when a rising cycle of criminality isn’t interrupted with prosecutions for quality-of-life crimes like shoplifting, drug possession, and disorderly conduct, a surge in lawlessness occurs, which was evident in the skyrocketing violent crime rate since Krasner’s election.

Similar to the aforementioned foreign influence model, Krasner and other Soros-backed progressive prosecutors have targeted police officers and sought to overturn past convictions, undermining public confidence in the justice system. This is when a friendly media infrastructure reports on these perceived “inequities,” causing supporters to seek more social-justice motivated reforms that violate due process.

The result has been a marked increase in crime, particularly violent offenses, as law enforcement faces demoralization and diminished prosecutorial support. The impact of these policies aligns with the broader objectives of transformative justice — redefining legal norms in a way that prioritizes social reconstruction over traditional law and order.

The parallels between Soros-funded transformative justice initiatives abroad and the domestic prosecutorial movement suggest a deliberate replication of foreign destabilization strategies within the United States. Just as these groups have used lawfare to reshape legal institutions in developing nations, similar tactics are being employed domestically to weaken traditional prosecutorial functions and implement alternative justice frameworks.

USAID’s role in funding these efforts raises serious concerns about the use of taxpayer dollars to support ideological legal reforms that ultimately undermine public safety and judicial integrity. The integration of international lawfare strategies into American legal systems represents not just a policy shift but a fundamental reimagining of justice that prioritizes activist objectives over established legal norms.

For many of us who were confused as to why Soros was funding increased lawlessness on America’s streets, the DOGE revelations demand a critical reassessment of USAID’s funding mechanisms and their broader implications for American legal and political stability. The alignment between Soros-funded transformative justice initiatives abroad and the domestic push for radical prosecutorial reform suggests a coordinated strategy that extends beyond national borders.

Congress, the Trump administration, and local oversight bodies like Attorney General Dave Sunday must investigate how these questionable funds contribute to efforts that erode rather than strengthen democratic institutions. Additionally, voters must be made aware of the broader implications of electing prosecutors whose policies align with potentially illicit activism funded by our own tax dollars.

The battle over the future of the American justice system is not just a local issue, but part of a broader ideological struggle that transcends borders. Recognizing and addressing the influence of political corruption from USAID to our local campaign finance violations is a crucial step in ensuring that the rule of law remains a pillar of democracy rather than a tool for radical social engineering.

Based in Philadelphia, A. Benjamin Mannes is a consultant and subject matter expert in security and criminal justice reform based on his own experiences on both sides of the criminal justice system. He is a corporate compliance executive who has served as a federal and municipal law enforcement officer, and as the former Director, Office of Investigations with the American Board of Internal Medicine. @PublicSafetySME