Reasonable Inference
The Election Official Legal Defense Network (EOLDN) — a project of the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), which received $69.5 million from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative in 2020 — provided free pro bono legal counsel to election officials facing legal exposure related to their administration of the 2020 election. EOLDN connected officials with “licensed, qualified, pro bono attorneys” at no cost, covering issues ranging from threats and harassment to litigation arising from their official duties. Critics, including the Wisconsin Office of Special Counsel, alleged that EOLDN may have violated state law prohibiting in-kind donations that “could reasonably be considered as a reward for any official action or inaction on the part of the local public official,” and that CEIR may have been “improperly coordinating legal defenses of election officials to protect CTCL, CEIR, Zuckerberg, [Priscilla] Chan and related entities.” Simultaneously, election integrity plaintiff attorneys across battleground states faced Rule 11 sanctions motions, court-ordered fee awards, and bar referrals pursued by state attorneys general and municipal counsel: in Michigan alone, plaintiff attorneys were ordered to pay over $175,000 in fees, referred to the state Attorney Grievance Commission, and faced ongoing disbarment proceedings — a record the Michigan AG’s office publicly celebrated. Separately, the 65 Project — a Democratic-affiliated dark-money organization — filed bar complaints against more than 111 election-challenge attorneys in 26 states with the stated goal of making them “toxic in their communities and in their firms.” The result was a structurally asymmetric legal environment in which election officials who were defendants in integrity challenges received well-funded pro bono counsel through the Zuckerberg-funded CEIR/EOLDN network, while plaintiff attorneys faced compounding financial and professional exposure — a dynamic critics characterized as coordinated, though no primary source documents direct Zuckerberg-network funding of the sanctions campaigns themselves.
Citations
CEIR received $69.5 million from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative in 2020, channeled through the Silicon Valley Community Foundation. InfluenceWatch, Center for Election Innovation & Research, citing Chan Zuckerberg Initiative’s own website: “CEIR ultimately received $69.5 million from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, which channeled the money through its account at the Silicon Valley Community Foundation.” Available at: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/center-for-election-innovation-research/ . CEIR’s own press release confirmed the donation: https://electioninnovation.org/press/chan-zuckerberg-increase-2020-election-support/. EOLDN is a project of CEIR: EOLDN FAQ confirms “EOLDN is a project of the nonpartisan, nonprofit Center for Election Innovation & Research.” Available at: https://eoldn.org/faq/.
EOLDN FAQ (eoldn.org/faq/): “EOLDN connects election officials in need of advice or assistance with licensed, qualified, pro bono attorneys.” Services include: “Attempts to undermine job duties and/or dealing with retaliation or intimidation at work”; “Other local officials providing advice or instruction (legal or otherwise) that may be in conflict with the election official’s legal duties”; “General consultation.” CEIR’s own description: “State and local election workers anywhere in the country can go to EOLDN.org… to request connection to a lawyer at no cost.” Available at: https://electioninnovation.org/update/what-is-the-election-official-legal-defense-network/
Gableman OSC Second Interim Report (Feb. 2022), as cited in InfluenceWatch CEIR profile: “The report claims that CEIR operated an Election Officials Legal Defense Network (EOLDN) created in December 2021 to provide ‘legal services for government officials on the hook for misconduct.’ Gableman alleged that EOLDN may have violated Wisconsin state law prohibiting in-kind or monetary donations that ‘could reasonably be considered as a reward for any official action or inaction on the part of the local public official.'” Gableman further alleged CEIR may be “‘improperly coordinating legal defenses of election officials to protect CTCL, CEIR, Zuckerberg, [Priscilla] Chan and related entities and individuals.'” InfluenceWatch source available at: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/center-for-election-innovation-research/ . Wisconsin GOP legislators’ statement (Dec. 2021): “It appears the press conference panel’s answer for those who question the integrity of an election influenced by Zuckerberg money, is to bring in more Zuckerberg money from CEIR and EOLDN to protect those who took Zuckerberg money from the CTCL.” Via Gateway Pundit / WISN reporting: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/roads-lead-mark-zuckerberg-newest-liberal-group-eoldn-organized-defend-shady-election-officials-free-zuckerberg-roots/
U.S. District Court (E.D. Mich.), Judge Linda V. Parker, King v. Whitmer sanctions order (Aug. 25, 2021): sanctions awarded against Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, and other attorneys; referral to Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission and bar disciplinary authorities in each attorney’s home jurisdiction. Attorneys ordered to pay over $175,000 in legal fees to defendants including the State of Michigan. Michigan AG Dana Nessel press release (Aug. 25, 2021): “I’m pleased to see that the Court has ensured there is accountability for the attorneys who perpetuated meritless arguments in court.” Available at: https://www.michigan.gov/ag/news/press-releases/2021/08/25/ag-nessel-responds-to-securing-sanctions-against-attorneys-involved-in-frivolous-election-lawsuit . Separate Colorado sanctions upheld through SCOTUS cert denial (Oct. 2023): https://www.michigan.gov/ag/news/press-releases/2023/10/13/us-supreme-court-upholds-sanctions-against-attorneys .
The 65 Project — described by The Hill as “a dark money group with Democratic Party affiliations” — filed bar ethics complaints against more than 111 attorneys in 26 states. Advisory board included former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and David Brock (founder of Media Matters). Brock stated: “Our goal is not only to bring the grievances in the bar complaints, but to shame them and make them toxic in their communities and in their firms.” The Hill (Mar. 7, 2022): https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/597163-group-trying-to-disbar-lawyers-who-worked-on-trumps-post-election/ . CNN (Mar. 10, 2022): https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/10/politics/ethics-complaints-attorney-misconduct-trump-election-reversal.