Hold onto your wallets, folks—far-left billionaire George Soros and his family have funneled over $71,000 into the campaign coffers of New York Attorney General Letitia James since 2019.
According to the New York Post, reports reveal that Soros, alongside his relatives, has backed James with significant donations, including $31,000 for her 2026 re-election bid, while also supporting far-left groups like the Working Families Party (WFP) that align with her progressive agenda.
Let’s rewind to 2003, when James became the first WFP candidate to clinch a New York City Council seat, representing parts of Brooklyn like Fort Greene. Her ties to the party’s values have only deepened since then.
Fast forward to 2018, and James opted to run as a Democrat for Attorney General alongside then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, declining the WFP line. Still, she embraced their endorsement for her 2022 re-election, showing her progressive roots run deep.
Since 2019, Soros and his family have poured more than $71,000 into James’ campaigns, with Soros himself contributing $18,000 in July 2024. His daughter-in-law, Jennifer Soros, chipped in $13,000 just a couple of months earlier in May.
Beyond direct donations, an additional $40,000 from the Soros clan supported James’ earlier runs. This family sees James as a key player in their ideological game plan.
But wait, there’s more—Soros’ influence extends through indirect channels. His Open Society Foundation has funneled $23.7 million to the WFP’s fundraising arm since 2016, while he and his family have directly donated $865,000 to the party’s New York branch since 2018.
James isn’t the only New York official catching Soros’ eye. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, another frequent target of conservative criticism, received indirect support via a $1 million donation from Soros to Color of Change’s PAC in 2021, plus $43,150 in direct contributions since then. Critics argue this financial web isn’t just generosity—it’s a calculated push for a far-left agenda. And when you look at James’ legal battles against President Trump, it’s hard not to raise an eyebrow.
Speaking of Trump, James has been relentless, from a 2018 campaign promise to probe his real estate dealings to an ongoing fraud case alleging he inflated his net worth. Though a state appellate panel overturned over $500 million in fines against Trump in August 2024, the fight continues.
James herself faced scrutiny in October 2024 with a mortgage fraud indictment tied to a Virginia property. She pleaded not guilty, and the case was dismissed by November without trial, despite multiple failed attempts by the Department of Justice to re-indict her.
Trump has repeatedly pointed fingers at Soros, claiming he’s the puppet master behind legal challenges from James, Bragg, and other progressive prosecutors. Whether that’s true or not, the money trail certainly invites questions.
Michael Henry, a Republican commercial litigator aiming to unseat James in 2026, isn’t holding back. “George Soros has spent years financing the radical left’s most extreme projects, and the outcome is almost always the same: instability and disorder that is destroying our state,” Henry said. While his words sting, they echo a growing concern among conservatives about donor influence on law enforcement priorities.
Henry doubled down, adding, “We saw it with [Manhattan District Attorney] Alvin Bragg, so no one should be surprised that [Soros] is heavily backing Letitia James’ ideological crusades and political vendettas that put New Yorkers’ safety on the back burner.” It’s a sharp critique, but one that struggles to prove direct causation between donations and policy—though the optics aren’t exactly pristine.
Efforts to get comments from the White House, James’ campaign, the Attorney General’s office, and even Soros’ spokesman Michael Vachon yielded nothing but silence. That lack of response only fuels the narrative that there’s something to hide—or at least something folks aren’t eager to defend publicly. So, New Yorkers, as this financial saga unfolds, the question remains: Are these donations just democratic support, or a down payment on a progressive agenda that’s reshaping the state’s legal landscape?