Nonprofit Organizations

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares39 Views

    Gloves Lincoln Wore to Ford’s Theater Sell for $1.5 Million at Auction

    by

    More than 100 relics connected to President Abraham Lincoln brought in $7.9 million, auctioneers said. The proceeds will help a presidential foundation repay a loan.A pair of leather gloves worn by President Abraham Lincoln to Ford’s Theater on the night of his assassination fetched $1.5 million at auction this week, part of a trove of relics from his life and death that a debt-saddled presidential foundation had put on the block.One of two handkerchiefs that Lincoln had with him on that fateful date in American history, April 14, 1865, sold for $826,000, according to Freeman’s | Hindman in Chicago, the auction house that handled Wednesday’s sale.Like the gloves, which a friend of the Lincolns had framed for display on his dining room wall, the handkerchief was described in an auction catalog as having been potentially stained with the president’s blood.And a cufflink-style gold and onyx button with the letter “L” on it, which a doctor removed to check for Lincoln’s pulse as he lay on his deathbed, went for $445,000.The auction of the items from the Lincoln Presidential Foundation, which was conducted in person, online and by phone, raised nearly $7.9 million, the auctioneers said.The total included a 28 percent buyer’s premium, which auction houses tack onto the hammer price to help cover expenses from sales.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares46 Views

      in Elections

      Virginia Farmers Are Reviving a Tradition of Harvesting Herbs

      by

      The forest behind Ryan Huish’s home doesn’t look like a traditional farm, but beneath the bright green canopy in southwest Virginia, he’s nurturing a thriving garden of medicinal herbs.On a warm afternoon in April, Dr. Huish, a biology professor at the University of Virginia’s College at Wise, led a troop of students along a footpath that wove through part of his family’s 60-acre property near Duffield. He encouraged students to pick edible plants like ramps (hints of garlic, they reported), pluck the leaves of trout lilies (sort of like kiwi) and dig up roots like Appalachian wasabi (yes, spicy).For centuries, these forest plants have been a part of Appalachian cultural heritage, used by local people for food, traditional medicine and extra income. But the market has long been poorly regulated, which has led to low prices and overharvesting.50 States, 50 Fixes is a series about local solutions to environmental problems. More to come this year.“The trade of forest botanicals has been going on for the past 300 years in the Appalachian Mountains,” said Katie Commender, director of the agroforestry program at a local nonprofit organization called the Appalachian Harvest Herb Hub. “When we talk to ginseng dealers and root buyers, a lot of the concern we hear is that tradition is dying out and not necessarily being passed on to the next generation.”Tell Us About Solutions Where You Live More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Michael Flynn, a Trump Ally, Sponsors Beethoven at the Kennedy Center

      by

      Following the president’s overhaul of the center, Mr. Flynn, the former national security adviser, has made a substantial gift to the National Symphony Orchestra.The list of donors to the National Symphony Orchestra, one of the Kennedy Center’s flagship ensembles, is usually filled with financiers, socialites, corporations and foundations.But the name of a sponsor of this week’s performances of Beethoven’s “Missa Solemnis” stood out. It was Michael T. Flynn, the general and former national security adviser during President Trump’s first term. He was listed, along with his nonprofit, America’s Future Inc., as “performance sponsors” for the National Symphony Orchestra’s concerts from May 15 to 17.Mr. Flynn said on social media that his nonprofit was “thrilled to sponsor a spectacular three-night performance at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts!”“This performance is filled with a vibrant celebration of music, culture, and the unyielding spirit uniting all Americans,” he wrote in a post on X. “The Kennedy Center shines as a proud symbol of our nation’s legacy!”Mr. Flynn’s gift to the National Symphony Orchestra totaled $300,000, according to two people familiar with the donation who were granted anonymity because details of the gift were not publicized.Officials at the Kennedy Center said they did not have details of the gift.“We didn’t know how much but we welcome all sponsorships,” the center said in a statement.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Lawsuit Challenges Trump’s Legal Rationale for Tariffs on China

      by

      The New Civil Liberties Alliance — a nonprofit group that describes itself as battling “violations by the administrative state” — sued the federal government on Thursday over the means by which it imposed steep new levies on Chinese imports earlier this year.The new filing, which the group said was the first such lawsuit to challenge the Trump administration over its tariffs, set the stage for what may become a closely watched legal battle. It comes on the heels of President Trump’s separate announcement on Wednesday of broader, more extensive tariffs targeting many U.S. trading partners around the world.At issue are the tariffs that Mr. Trump announced on China in February and expanded in March. To impose them, Mr. Trump cited a 1970s law that generally grants the president sweeping powers during an economic emergency, known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.Mr. Trump charged that an influx of illegal drugs from China constituted a threat to the United States. But the alliance argued in the lawsuit, on behalf of Simplified, a Pensacola, Fla.-based company, that the administration had misapplied the law. Instead, the group said the law “does not allow a president to impose tariffs,” but rather is supposed to be reserved for putting in place trade embargoes and sanctions against “dangerous foreign actors.”Port Manatee in Palmetto, Fla., on TuesdayScott McIntyre for The New York TimesMr. Trump cited that same law as one of the legal justifications for the expansive global tariffs he announced with an executive order on Wednesday. That order raised the tariff rate on China to at least 54 percent, adding new levies on top of those that the president imposed earlier this year.Mr. Trump’s new order specifically described the U.S. trade deficit with other nations as “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States.”For now, the alliance asked the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Florida to block implementation and enforcement of the president’s earlier tariffs on China. “You can look through the statute all day long; you’re not going to see the president may put tariffs on the American people once he declares an emergency,” said John J. Vecchione, senior litigation counsel for the alliance.A spokesman for the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Nonprofit’s Leader Convicted of Siphoning Off $240 Million in Federal Food Aid

      by

      Aimee Bock was accused of overseeing a scheme that exploited lax pandemic-era controls, and reaped millions with fake invoices for nonexistent meals.The leader of a Minnesota anti-hunger nonprofit was convicted in U.S. District Court on Wednesday of masterminding a brazen scheme that reaped more than $240 million in pandemic relief funds with a network of bogus food kitchens that billed the government for 91 million meals.The nonprofit’s leader, Aimee Bock, 44, was convicted by a jury of seven counts, including wire fraud and bribery. Another defendant, Salim Said — a 36-year-old who oversaw one of the bogus kitchens — was convicted of 20 counts, also including wire fraud and bribery.When Ms. Bock was charged in 2022, federal prosecutors said her scheme was the largest known fraud against the government’s Covid-19 relief programs.At least 70 people were charged in the scheme, and more than 40 have already pleaded guilty or been convicted. Last year, another case related to the same scandal made national news, when someone attempted to bribe a juror in a separate trial by leaving about $120,000 in cash at her home in a Hallmark gift bag. Five people were later charged with bribery in that case.After Wednesday’s verdicts were read, Judge Nancy Brasel ordered that Ms. Bock and Mr. Said remain in jail to await their sentencing, according to a report from the courtroom by The Sahan Journal, a nonprofit newsroom. The charges carry potential sentences of more than a decade in prison.The fraud scheme targeted two programs meant to feed hungry children, which were funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture but administered by the state of Minnesota. The system relied on nonprofit groups called “sponsors” to be its watchdogs. They were supposed to oversee individual kitchens and feeding sites and make sure they were not inflating the number of children they served.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Climate United Sues E.P.A. Over Frozen $20 Billion

      by

      In a lawsuit, Climate United claims the E.P.A. is illegally withholding funds that have become a target of the Trump administration.A multibillion dollar dispute between the Environmental Protection Agency and several nonprofit organizations escalated on Saturday when one group sued the E.P.A. and Citibank, seeking access to grant money that has been frozen under President Trump.Climate United, a nonprofit organization, claimed that the E.P.A. and Citibank have illegally withheld a nearly $7 billion award announced last April. Citibank has housed the funds as part of a green financing program to finance projects that address climate change.The funds are part of a larger pot of money, $20 billion, that have been swept up in controversy after Lee Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, called the green financing program a “scheme” that was “purposely designed to obligate all of the money in a rush job with reduced oversight.”Now, some of the nonprofits say, their bank accounts are frozen and that they are struggling to pay staff.Climate United had planned to loan the money to developers across the country in support of solar power, electric trucks, and energy-efficient affordable housing projects, and said the freeze has meant small businesses and developers are unable to draw down funds they were promised.“We’re not trying to make a political statement here,” said Beth Bafford, chief executive of Climate United. “This is about math for homeowners, for truck drivers, for public schools — we know that accessing clean energy saves them money that they can use on far more important things.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Bid to Freeze Foreign Aid

      by

      The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected President Trump’s emergency request to freeze nearly $2 billion in foreign aid as part of his efforts to slash government spending.The court’s brief order was unsigned, which is typical when the justices act on emergency applications. It said only that the trial judge, who had ordered the government to resume payments, “should clarify what obligations the government must fulfill.”But the ruling is one of the court’s first moves in response to the flurry of litigation filed in response to President Trump’s efforts to dramatically reshape government. The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the three liberal members to form a majority.Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing for the four dissenting justices, said the majority had gone profoundly astray.“Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) $2 billion taxpayer dollars? “ he asked. “The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.”The administration halted the aid on Jan. 20, President Trump’s first day in office. Recipients and other nonprofit groups filed two lawsuits challenging the freeze as an unconstitutional exercise of presidential power that thwarted congressional appropriations for the U.S. Agency for International Development.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      OpenAI Fires Back at Elon Musk’s Lawsuit

      by

      The artificial intelligence start-up argues that Mr. Musk is trying to hamstring its business as he builds a rival company.Earlier this month, Elon Musk asked a federal court to block OpenAI’s efforts to transform itself from a nonprofit into a purely for-profit company.On Friday, OpenAI responded with its own legal filing, arguing that Mr. Musk is merely trying to hamstring OpenAI as he builds a rival company, called xAI.What Mr. Musk is asking for would “debilitate OpenAI’s business, board deliberations, and mission to create safe and beneficial A.I. — all to the advantage of Musk and his own A.I. company,” the filing said. “The motion should be denied.”OpenAI also disputed many of the claims made by Mr. Musk in the lawsuit he brought against OpenAI earlier this year. In a blog post published before Friday’s filing, OpenAI portrayed Mr. Musk as a hypocrite, saying that he had tried to transform the lab from a nonprofit into a for-profit operation before he left the organization six years ago.The filing and blog post included documents claiming to show that in 2017, Jared Birchall, the head of Mr. Musk’s family office, registered a company called Open Artificial Intelligence Technologies, Inc. that was meant to be a for-profit incarnation of OpenAI.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Regulator Sues Anti-Police Activist Who Spent Charity Funds on Himself

      by

      Brandon Anderson, who used his nonprofit’s accounts to rent mansions and buy luxury clothes, was featured in a New York Times story in August.The District of Columbia’s attorney general on Monday sued an activist known for his calls to abolish the police, saying that he diverted $75,000 from a charity to pay for mansion rentals, a trip to Cancún and designer clothes.Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb, an elected Democrat who oversees nonprofits in the city, said Brandon Anderson had turned an anti-police-brutality charity called Raheem AI into a piggy bank for himself.Mr. Schwalb also sued Raheem AI. He asked a judge to shutter the organization, bar Mr. Anderson from leading any other Washington nonprofit and order Mr. Anderson or Raheem AI to repay the $75,000. The money would then be given to a charity chosen by the judge.“Brandon Anderson misused charitable donations to fund lavish vacations and shopping sprees, and the Raheem AI board of directors let him get away with it,” Mr. Schwalb said in a written statement. He continued, “My office will not allow people to masquerade behind noble causes while violating the law.”Mr. Schwalb has jurisdiction in the case because Raheem AI was incorporated in Washington. A spokesman for him declined to say what prompted the investigation. A former staff member at the nonprofit named Jasmine Banks told The New York Times this year that she had reached out to Mr. Schwalb’s office, seeking help after the nonprofit stopped paying her salary.Mr. Anderson did not respond to a request for comment sent on Monday morning. He has previously told The Times that he takes responsibility for the group’s failures: “The bottom line is simply that it didn’t work, and as the leader of that effort I share most of the blame.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More