Exposing the Illegal Collusion Between Progressive Activists and State Governments: The All In Campus Democracy Challenge Scandal

In an increasingly politicized education system, a dangerous pattern has emerged: progressive nonprofits are leveraging student data and taxpayer-funded government partnerships to manipulate the youth vote in favor of left-wing candidates. At the heart of this operation is the ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge, a program of the progressive nonprofit Civic Nation, which is now deeply embedded in state election infrastructure. What appears to be a civic engagement campaign is, in truth, a coordinated and potentially illegal effort to use student data and institutional power to drive partisan outcomes under the guise of nonpartisan participation.

The Players: Civic Nation and the ALL IN Challenge - Illegal Collusion

Civic Nation is a well-funded, overtly progressive 501(c)(3) organization tied closely to the Obama Foundation and staffed by former Democratic operatives. It openly supports progressive causes ranging from climate activism to gender ideology, racial equity, and “voting rights”—a euphemism for policies that benefit Democrat turnout operations. One of its flagship programs, the ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge, claims to promote “nonpartisan” student civic engagement. But a deeper look reveals troubling signs of collusion, partisan coordination, and data exploitation.

Civic Nation’s ALL IN program boasts “partnerships” with secretaries of state in at least six battleground states—a highly unusual arrangement for a 501(c)(3) charity, which is legally barred from engaging in partisan electioneering or coordinating with campaigns.

Support ISueGov

The Collusive Partnerships: 6 States of Concern

The following states have established official government partnerships with the ALL IN Challenge, a private organization driven by ideological goals:

1. Michigan Since 2019, the Michigan Department of State has been in partnership with ALL IN to run the Michigan Collegiate Voting Challenge. This “challenge” gives state endorsement and visibility to a Civic Nation-run operation within public colleges, collecting participation data while offering awards to campuses based on voter turnout—a mechanism ripe for misuse and potential pressure tactics. Michigan PDF Source

2. New Jersey New Jersey’s Department of State runs the “NJ Ballot Bowl” in collaboration with ALL IN. This is more than a feel-good competition—it’s a mass mobilization campaign underwritten by a partisan nonprofit and endorsed by the state itself, with potential access to student voter registration data. NJ Ballot Bowl Source

3. Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar announced in April 2024 a formal partnership with ALL IN to increase youth voter engagement—specifically targeting the 2026 election cycle. This explicit election timing, combined with the involvement of a progressive nonprofit, raises red flags about coordination in violation of both IRS and state election law. News Source NV SOS Source

4. Arizona The Arizona Secretary of State’s office directly promotes the Arizona Campus Voting Challenge in partnership with ALL IN. In a state where elections are often decided by razor-thin margins, this level of engagement by a partisan-aligned nonprofit raises serious conflict-of-interest concerns. Arizona SOS Source

5. Maine The Maine Secretary of State runs the “Maine Campus Voting Challenge” jointly with ALL IN, extending the reach of Civic Nation into yet another public education system and reinforcing its control over campus voter efforts. Maine SOS Source

6. Colorado In Colorado, the Secretary of State’s office openly promotes the Colorado Campus Voting Challenge in partnership with ALL IN. This public endorsement gives cover to what is functionally a progressive campaign operation embedded within college bureaucracies. Colorado SOS Source

The Legal Violations: 501(c)(3) Rules and Student Privacy Laws

At the core of this scheme is the misuse of student data. ALL IN collects detailed voter registration and turnout data through partnerships with colleges—many of which receive federal funding. Under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), colleges are prohibited from sharing personally identifiable student data with third parties without consent. Yet through these “challenges,” Civic Nation is gaining access to and leveraging aggregate student data to determine turnout trends and, potentially, adjust outreach strategies.

Furthermore, Civic Nation, as a 501(c)(3), is legally barred from engaging in any partisan activity. Yet the organization’s ideological bias and coordination with Democratic-aligned election officials make its “nonpartisan” claim implausible.

The involvement of secretaries of state—elected officials often affiliated with one party—raises ethical and potentially legal questions. When public officials partner with private groups to target specific voter blocs favorable to their party, it wreaks of illegal collusion and skirts dangerously close to electioneering on the taxpayer’s dime.

The Endgame: Data, Mobilization, and a Progressive Power Grab

Make no mistake: this is not about voter participation. This is about engineering a generational voting bloc aligned with the left using taxpayer-funded institutions. With the thin margins that decide elections in Arizona, Michigan, and Nevada, even a slight shift in youth turnout can sway outcomes. And by embedding themselves within the public education infrastructure, Civic Nation and its partners ensure a one-sided message and method of civic engagement.

This is not “democracy.” This is soft electioneering masquerading as civic education.

Support ISueGov

What Needs to Happen Next

1. State Investigations: Attorneys general and state auditors must investigate the legality of these partnerships, especially in regard to data sharing and potential campaign coordination.

2. IRS Complaints: Civic Nation should be the subject of a formal IRS complaint for violating its 501(c)(3) status through political activity and partisan alignment.

3. Congressional Oversight: House committees on education and election integrity must hold hearings to determine the scope of this collusion between state officials and partisan nonprofits.

4. FERPA Audits: The Department of Education should launch FERPA audits of every college involved in the ALL IN Challenge to determine whether student data is being mishandled.

Conclusion

Civic engagement is a noble goal. But when it is co-opted by partisan actors and embedded into public institutions under the pretense of neutrality, it becomes propaganda. The ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge is not about democracy—it is about control. Control of young minds, control of public institutions, and control of the electoral process. It is time to expose this operation for what it is: a taxpayer-funded, data-driven machine designed to manufacture progressive power under the cover of civic virtue.