ExtremismLedger is a living public-interest database. Records are continuously reviewed, updated, and expanded as new verified information becomes available.

About ExtremismLedger

Last updated: September 2026

Mission

ExtremismLedger is an independent, citation-backed public-interest publisher and research project documenting extremism, anti-democratic conduct, serious constitutional and rule-of-law abuses, election interference or subversion, and subversion or attempted subversion of American constitutional democratic-republic norms. The project exists so that journalists, researchers, and the public have a sourced, continuously reviewed reference for understanding this activity.

Publication decisions are made under a written editorial framework governing inclusion, sourcing, evidentiary standards, terminology, classification, corrections, and relationships between subjects. Every inclusion pathway is conduct- and evidence-based and is applied under the same standard regardless of political party, affiliation, ideology, office, or viewpoint.

Viewpoint-neutral inclusion standards do not mean equal or proportional coverage of every ideology. ExtremismLedger's primary editorial focus is conservative and right-wing extremism and related anti-democratic conduct, constitutional and rule-of-law abuses, election interference or subversion, and subversion of American constitutional democratic-republic norms. The editor retains final authority over what is included.

What ExtremismLedger Documents

Records document organizations, individuals, movements, and incidents whose documented conduct falls within one or more of these areas:

Extremism — alignment with, organized activity on behalf of, or substantive support of a movement or ideology organized around political violence, coercion, intimidation, or the targeting of people because of a protected characteristic, including organized anti-LGBTQI+ extremism.
Anti-democratic conduct — documented conduct that ExtremismLedger's Editorial Board determines, in the public interest, materially conflicts with the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution, American constitutional law, democratic governmental processes, or longstanding norms of the American constitutional democratic republic.
Serious constitutional and rule-of-law abuses, such as knowing defiance of a binding court order or the use of governmental power to retaliate against protected speech, press, or political participation.
Election interference or subversion, by public officials or private actors.
Subversion or attempted subversion of American constitutional democratic-republic norms — conduct intended or reasonably capable of undermining constitutional structures, lawful governmental processes, checks and balances, peaceful transfers of power, independent courts, representative government, protected political participation, press and speech freedoms, or other historically recognized norms necessary to the republic's functioning.

Anti-democratic conduct is never defined as mere disagreement with a policy, an ideology, a political party, or a political affiliation. Holding or advocating a political or economic position, however far from the mainstream, is not by itself a basis for inclusion. Coverage may include historical and contemporary conduct, public statements, organizational relationships, government records, court proceedings, criminal cases, and other matters relevant to understanding the subjects documented by the project.

Editorial Standards and Inclusion

Inclusion is an editorial, public-interest determination made under our published editorial criteria — not a subjective judgment about a person's character, associations, or beliefs in the abstract. Appearing in ExtremismLedger does not, by itself, mean that a person or group is being declared criminal, extremist, unconstitutional, or anti-democratic as a whole; each page identifies the specific documented conduct it rests on. The Editorial Board retains final authority over inclusion and public-interest decisions.

People are documented for different, non-interchangeable reasons. Some subjects independently satisfy an inclusion criterion through their own conduct. Others — for example a journalist, host, executive, or other participant with a genuinely material connection to a qualifying organization, incident, or record — are documented under a separate, explicitly labeled basis that does not itself classify that person as an extremist. Where that distinction applies, the page states it directly.

Association with an organization, individual, incident, or movement does not automatically mean that a person shares every belief, statement, action, or alleged act associated with another participant, and being named in connection with an incident does not by itself mean that a person committed unlawful conduct.

Sources and Verification

We prefer primary and authoritative sources when available — court records, government documents, official reports, legislative records, and direct statements — capable of independent verification. Reliable, independent reporting is used for corroboration and additional context. Every factual statement is expected to trace to a source meeting our editorial sourcing standards.

We distinguish clearly between established facts, documented allegations, criminal charges, convictions and other adjudications, and editorial classifications. Unresolved allegations are identified as allegations, with their source and status, and are not presented as established fact. A charge is never described as a conviction or proof of guilt. Pending litigation, findings, convictions, acquittals, dismissals, settlements, and reversals are each identified as what they are.

Living Database and Permanence

ExtremismLedger is a living database. Records are continuously reviewed, and are corrected, clarified, annotated, expanded, or updated to reflect later developments as new verified information becomes available.

Publication is presumptively permanent. A subject's objection, disagreement with an editorial determination, reputational impact, a change in political circumstances, or a removal request is not, on its own, a reason to delete a record; we correct, clarify, annotate, or update it instead. Removal is reserved for exceptional circumstances such as legal necessity, mistaken identity, unsubstantiated material claims, a serious source-integrity failure, or extraordinary editorial circumstances.

Corrections, Disputes, and Removal Requests

We take factual accuracy seriously and welcome correction requests. To report a factual error, dispute a characterization, provide additional evidence, or request that material be corrected or removed, use the report form and select Correction, Dispute, or Removal Request. Please identify the specific statement, record, or source being challenged and provide any supporting information available.

Full detail on how correction and removal requests are handled is in our Legal & Editorial Disclaimer.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions — including what subjects are investigated, documented, classified, updated, corrected, retained, or removed — are made by ExtremismLedger under its editorial policies and applicable law. Subjects of coverage, advocacy organizations, political organizations, government officials, and other outside parties do not possess editorial authority over ExtremismLedger merely because they request or demand a particular outcome. We welcome evidence capable of improving the accuracy of the record.

ExtremismLedger is an independent public-interest publisher and research project. In researching, documenting, commenting on, and publishing information about matters of public concern, it exercises speech, press, research, commentary, and publication rights protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, subject to applicable law.