American Civil Liberties Union

American Civil Liberties Union
Basic facts
Location:	New York
Type:	501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4)
Affiliation:	Nonpartisan
Top official:	Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director
Founder(s):	Roger Baldwin, Crystal Eastman, and Albert DeSilver
Year founded:	1920
Website:	Official website

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is nonprofit organization that, according to the organization's website, "continues to fight government abuse and to vigorously defend individual freedoms including speech and religion, a woman’s right to choose, the right to due process, citizens’ rights to privacy and much more."

With a national headquarters in New York, the ACLU has autonomous affiliates in each of the 50 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico.

Background

The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 by Roger Baldwin, Crystal Eastman, and Albert DeSilver, in response to raids and arrests carried out by Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer.

A few years later, the ACLU defended Tennessee biology teacher John Scopes when he was charged with violating the state's prohibition on teaching evolution. Since then, some of the ACLU's notable cases have included

Leadership

As of July 2025, the following individuals held leadership positions at the ACLU:

• Anthony Romero, Executive Director
• Terence Dougherty, Deputy Executive Director for Operations and General Counsel
• AJ Hikes, Deputy Executive Director for Strategy & Culture
• Kriston Alford McIntosh, Chief Communications and Marketing Officer
• Kary Moss, Director of Affiliate Support & Nationwide Initiatives
• Deirdre Schifeling, Chief Political and Advocacy Officer
• Cecillia Wang, National Legal Director
• Mark Wier, Chief Development Officer

Work and activities

The name "American Civil Liberties Union" refers to a group of separate but affiliated entities that work towards the same goal. There are two national groups: a 501(c)(4) organization named the "American Civil Liberties Union" and a 501(c)(3) organization known as the "ACLU Foundation." Both organizations share the same office space in New York and provide funding for litigation and public awareness programs. The difference between the two organizations exists in regard to their lobbying efforts. The ACLU website's description of the distinction reads as follows:

“

The American Civil Liberties Union engages in legislative lobbying. As an organization that is eligible to receive contributions that are tax-deductible by the contributor, federal law limits the extent to which the ACLU Foundation may engage in lobbying activities. Therefore, most of the lobbying activity done by the ACLU and discussed in this Web site is done by the American Civil Liberties Union. By contrast, most of the ACLU's litigation and communication efforts described in this Web site are done by the ACLU Foundation.

”

Legal activity

The ACLU website highlights the 1925 Scopes trial as one of its earliest cases. The group recruited teacher John Scopes to challenge a Tennessee law banning the teaching of evolution. When he was prosecuted, the ACLU worked with attorney Clarence Darrow to defend him. The ACLU website says: "Although Scopes was found guilty (the verdict was later overturned because of a sentencing error), the trial made national headlines and helped persuade the public on the importance of academic freedom."

Other notable legal work listed on the group's website include:

• Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
• Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
• Roe v. Wade (1973)
• National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)
• ACLU v. Reno (1997)

The ACLU's website says the group "appear[s] before the Supreme Court more than any other organization except the Department of Justice."

For a full list of cases involving the ACLU, click here.

Electoral activities and influence

2024 elections

On June 5, 2024, the ACLU announced plans to spend $25 million on down-ballot races. The group planned to be involved in the U.S. Senate election in Wisconsin, various state supreme court elections, and various state legislative elections. The group also planned to spend money on abortion ballot measures in states such as Florida and Nevada, as well as efforts to reform redistricting in Ohio. They also planned to invest in programs to educate voters about how to deal with hostile poll monitors.

2020 elections

On March 31, 2019, the ACLU announced plans to spend $30 million to influence the 2020 election cycle.

2016 elections

During the 2016 election cycle, the ACLU contributed $6,570 to federal candidates. Below are the top five contributions made by the ACLU during the 2016 election cycle.

Top five candidate contributions made by the ACLU during the 2016 election cycle
Election cycle	Candidate	Party	State	Office	Total	Race outcome
2016	Hillary Clinton		NY	President	$2,920	d
2016	Mike Derrick		NY	U.S. House	$1,500	d
2016	Nanette Barragan		CA	U.S. House	$500	a
2016	Angie Craig		MN	U.S. House	$500	d
2016	Monica Vernon		IA	U.S. House	$500	d

2014 elections

During the 2014 election cycle, the ACLU contributed $1,500 to two federal candidates.

Candidate contributions made by the ACLU during the 2014 election cycle
Election cycle	Candidate	Party	State	Office	Total	Race outcome
2014	Shenna Bellows		ME	U.S. Senate	$1,000	d
2014	Dick Durbin		IL	U.S. Senate	$500	d

2012 elections

During the 2012 election cycle, the ACLU contributed $22,625 to federal candidates. Below are the top five contributions made by the ACLU during the 2012 election cycle.

Top five candidate contributions made by the ACLU during the 2012 election cycle
Election cycle	Candidate	Party	State	Office	Total	Race outcome
2012	Barack Obama		IL	President	$21,125	a
2012	Kelda Helen Roys		WI	U.S. House	$500	d
2012	Bill Foster		IL	U.S. House	$250	a
2012	Lois Frankel		FL	U.S. House	$250	a
2012	Hakeem Jeffries		NY	U.S. House	$250	a

Finances

The following is a breakdown of the ACLU's revenues and expenses from 2012 to 2024. The information comes from ProPublica

American Civil Liberties Union financial data 2012-2024

Year	Revenue	Expenses
2012	$33.9 million	$31.9 million
2013	$34.7 million	$36.9 million
2014	$36.9 million	$37.0 million
2015	$50.6 million	$42.0 million
2016	$42.8 million	$38.6 million
2017	$156 million	$66.4 million
2018	$144 million	$110 million
2019	$139 million	$146 million
2020	$140 million	$144 million
2021	$171 million	$156 million
2022	$162 million	$163 million
2023	$147 million	$175 million
2024	$143 million	$144 million

Notable endorsements

See also: Ballotpedia: Our approach to covering endorsements

This section displays endorsements this organization made in elections within Ballotpedia's coverage scope.

Notable ballot measure endorsements by American Civil Liberties Union

Measure	Position	Outcome
Alabama Constitutional Amendment 774, Sanctity of Marriage Amendment (June 2006)  source	Oppose	Approved
Arizona Proposition 107, Definition of Marriage Amendment (2006)  source	Oppose	Defeated
Arizona Proposition 308, In-State Tuition for Non-Citizen Residents Measure (2022)  source	Support	Approved
Colorado Amendment 67, Definition of Person Initiative (2014)  source	Oppose	Defeated
Colorado Proposition 130, Law Enforcement Funding Initiative (2024)  source	Oppose	Approved
Florida Amendment 2, Definition of Marriage Initiative (2008)  source	Oppose	Approved
Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 2, No Right to Abortion in Constitution Amendment (2022)  source	Oppose	Defeated
Michigan Proposal 2, Voting Policies in Constitution Amendment (2022)  source	Support	Approved
Michigan Proposal 3, Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative (2022)  source	Support	Approved
Minneapolis, Minnesota, Question 2, Replace Police Department with Department of Public Safety Initiative (November 2021)  source	Support	Defeated
Ohio Issue 1, 60% Vote Requirement to Approve Constitutional Amendments Measure (2023)  source 1  source 2  source 3	Oppose	Defeated
Ohio Issue 1, Establish the Citizens Redistricting Commission Initiative (2024)  source 1  source 2  source 3  source 4  source 5	Support	Defeated
Ohio Issue 1, Right to Make Reproductive Decisions Including Abortion Initiative (2023)  source	Support	Approved
Oregon Measure 110, Drug Decriminalization and Addiction Treatment Initiative (2020)  source	Support	Approved
South Dakota Initiative 11, Abortion Ban Measure (2008)  source	Oppose	Defeated
South Dakota Referendum 6, Abortion Ban Measure (2006)  source	Oppose	Defeated
Utah Amendment 3, Definition of Marriage Amendment (2004)  source	Oppose	Overturned
Washington Initiative 471, Prohibit Public Funds for Abortions Measure (1984)  source	Oppose	Defeated
Oregon Measure 36, Legally Recognized Marriage Initiative (2004)  source	Oppose	Approved

Noteworthy events

ACLU v. South Carolina Election Commission (SEC) and Governor Henry McMaster

See also: Political responses to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020

Coronavirus pandemic
Select a topic from the dropdown below to learn more. Political responses overviewState reopening plansDocumenting America's Path to RecoveryElection changesChanges to vote-by-mail and absentee voting proceduresFederal responsesState responsesState executive ordersStay-at-home ordersMultistate agreementsNon-governmental reopening plansEvictions and foreclosures policiesTravel restrictionsEnacted state legislationState legislative session changesSchool closuresState court closuresInmate releasesLocal government responsesDiagnosed or quarantined politiciansBallot measure changesArguments about government responsesThe 1918 influenza pandemicPandemic Response Accountability CommitteeUnemployment filingsLawsuitsBallotpedia's polling on the coronavirus pandemicSubmit

The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of South Carolina, and NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund have filed a federal lawsuit on April 22, 2020, against the South Carolina Election Commission (SEC) and South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster (R). The ACLU argued that voters should be able to vote by mail during the coronavirus pandemic and that voters should not have to choose between their health and their right to vote.

ACLU v. ICE, DHS

The ACLU filed a national class-action lawsuit against multiple federal government agencies, including Immigrants and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Customs and Border Protection, and the Office of Refugee Resettlement, on March 9, 2018. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, accused the federal government of unlawfully separating asylum-seeking parents and children without presenting evidence that the parent presented a danger to the child. The suit is an expansion of an earlier lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf of a Congolese mother and her 7-year-old child who were detained separately.

The lawsuit asked a judge to declare family separation unlawful.

Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a statement, "Whether or not the Trump administration wants to call this a 'policy,' it certainly is engaged in a widespread practice of tearing children away from their parents. A national class-action lawsuit is appropriate because this is a national practice."

DHS Press Secretary Tyler Houlton reportedly said, "We ask that members of the public and media view advocacy group claims that we are separating women and children for reasons other than to protect the child with the level of skepticism they deserve."

Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

On March 10, 2015, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the United States National Security Agency (NSA) on behalf of a group of nonprofit organizations. The plaintiffs in Wikimedia Foundation, et al. v. NSA, et al. contended that the NSA's practice of "upstream" internet surveillance violated their Fourth Amendment right to privacy and infringed on their First Amendment rights while exceeding the Congressional authority granted by the FISA Amendments Act.

The central issue in this case was a practice that the NSA used to tap into online communications involving Americans and foreigners. The practice is known as "upstream" surveillance because the Internet traffic that the NSA intercepted and analyzed was obtained close to the source, with the help of major telecommunications companies. The NSA claimed spying authority under the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, while the ACLU contended that the organization's warrantless review process illegally probed the email and Internet communications of millions of Americans.

The lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Maryland where the NSA is headquartered. The 9 plaintiffs that the ACLU represented in this case were Wikimedia Foundation, the Rutherford Institute, The Nation magazine, Amnesty International USA, PEN American Center, Human Rights Watch, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Global Fund for Women, and the Washington Office on Latin America. Defendants included the NSA, the U.S. Department of Justice, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

See also

• What is an influencer?

External links

• American Civil Liberties Union official website
• American Civil Liberties Union on Facebook
• American Civil Liberties Union on X
• American Civil Liberties Union on YouTube
• American Civil Liberties Union on Instagram
• American Civil Liberties Union on TikTok