Skip to the page content
Your donations
Passes our checks

Southeastern Legal Foundation Inc

EIN 58-1247027 · Roswell, GA

Public records show a registered, tax-exempt organization in good standing.

LegitimacyPassesRegistration and standingFinancial healthGood87 out of 100GovernanceGood85 out of 100Impact evidenceDescribes programsHow well its results are evidenced

What it says it does

THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION, INC. (SLF) IS AS A PUBLIC INTEREST LAW FIRM AND POLICY CENTER.

Income
$2.3 million
Spending
$2.3 million
Spent on programs
94%
Reserves
41.7 months of spending
Largest source of income
donations and private grants, 80%
Employees
6
Highest pay
$272,767, executive di

Source: Form 990 for the year ending June 30, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Financial health

Good: 87 out of 100. Higher than 66% of charities in its peer group (civil rights, $1m to $10m).

  • Reserves

    35 of 35

    Spendable reserves would cover 41.7 months of spending.

  • Debt

    20 of 20

    It owes 1% of what it owns.

  • Living within its means

    12 of 15

    Income exceeded spending by 1% of income.

  • Income trend

    5 of 15

    Income fell 14% on the year before.

  • Spending floor

    15 of 15

    94% of spending went to programs and raising each dollar of donations cost 2 cents.

Source: Form 990 for the year ending June 30, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Governance

Good: 85 out of 100. Higher than 32% of charities in its peer group (civil rights, $1m to $10m).

  • Independent board

    25 of 25

    8 of 8 voting board members are independent.

  • Conflict of interest policy

    15 of 15

    Has a written conflict of interest policy.

  • Whistleblower policy

    8 of 8

    Has a written whistleblower policy.

  • Record keeping policy

    7 of 7

    Has a written policy on keeping and destroying records.

  • Board minutes

    5 of 5

    Keeps minutes of board meetings.

  • Board sees the tax return

    10 of 10

    Gave the board a copy of this return before filing it.

  • Pay set independently

    5 of 5

    Sets its chief executive's pay through independent review and comparison.

  • Independent check of accounts

    0 of 15

    Its accounts were not audited or reviewed by an independent accountant.

  • No reported misuse

    10 of 10

    Reports no diversion of assets, excess benefits or loans to insiders.

Source: Form 990 for the year ending June 30, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Impact evidence

Describes programs. Its tax return describes what it does but we have found no measurable results in it.

Programs described in its return (2)
  1. $2.2 million spent. IN ADDITION TO LEGAL SERVICES, THE ORGANIZATION ALSO CONDUCTS NONPARTISAN STUDIES AND RESEARCHES AND COLLECTS, COMPILES, AND PUBLISHES FULL AND FAIR PRESENTATION OF FACTS, INFORMATION, AND STATISTICS CONCERNING THE EFFECTS OF GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES UPON THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.
  2. CARPENTER V. VILSACK, ET AL. (DISTRICT COURT OF WYOMING AND 10TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS; CASE 21-CV-0103-F). SLF REPRESENTS LEISL CARPENTER IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE USDA CHALLENGING THE USDA'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL FARM LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM THAT EXCLUDES WHITE FARMERS AND RANCHERS BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR. THIS MATTER CONCLUDED IN FY24. DEEMAR V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON/SKOKIE, ET AL. (NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS; CASE 1:21-CV-03466). SLF REPRESENTS STACY DEEMAR IN A LAWSUIT SEEKING TO STOP THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FROM DISCRIMINATING AGAINST ALL OF ITS TEACHERS AND ALL OF ITS STUDENTS ON THE BASIS OF RACE THROUGH ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL TEACHER TRAINING, CLASSROOM CURRICULUM, AND OVERALL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. HENDERSON, ET AL. V. SPRINGFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOLS, ET AL. (WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI AND 8TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS; CASE 6:21-CV-03219). SLF REPRESENTS BROOKE HENDERSON AND JENNIFER LUMLEY IN A LAWSUIT SEEKING TO STOP THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FROM VIOLATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND REQUIRING AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT THAT ITS EDUCATORS COMMIT TO EQUITY, BECOME ANTI-RACIST EDUCATORS, AND AFFIRM DIVISIVE AND DISCRIMINATORY PROGRAMMING THAT PROMOTES TREATING INDIVIDUALS DIFFERENTLY BASED ON SKIN COLOR. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION V. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA; 1:24-CV-01744-MHC). SLF FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FOR FAILING TO RESPOND TO A FOIA REQUEST. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. THIS MATTER CONCLUDED IN FY24. STOVALL V. JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, ET AL. (WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY; CASE 3:24-CV-336-RGJ). SLF FILED A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF A PARENT WHO WAS DENIED DOCUMENTS IN RESPONSE TO AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST ABOUT STUDENT SURVEYS BECAUSE OF ALLEGED COPYRIGHT PROTECTIONS. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. KANSAS ET AL. V. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ET AL. (DISTRICT OF KANSAS; CASE 24-4041-JWB). SLF FILED A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF MOMS FOR LIBERTY AND YOUNG AMERICA'S FOUNDATION AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CHALLENGING THE APRIL 2024 TITLE IX RULE. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. STRICKLAND V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, ET AL. (NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS; CASE 2:24-CV-60-Z). SLF REPRESENTS FARMERS IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE USDA CHALLENGING 8 USDA DISASTER RELIEF PROGRAMS THAT EXCLUDE WHITE MALE FARMERS BECAUSE OF THEIR SEX AND SKIN COLOR. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. HOLMAN V. VILSACK, ET AL. (WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AND 6TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS; CASE 1:21-CV-01085-STA-JAY). SLF REPRESENTS A FARMER IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE USDA CHALLENGING THE USDA'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL FARM LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM THAT EXCLUDES WHITE FARMERS AND RANCHERS BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. KANSAS, ET AL. V. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA; CASE 2:24-CV-00076). SLF REPRESENTS GEORGIA FRUIT AND VEGETABLE GROWERS ASSOCIATION AND FARMERS IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR CHALLENGING THE DEPARTMENT'S REGULATION THAT AFFORDS H2A FOREIGN WORKERS PROTECTION UNDER THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. CHOICE REFRIGERANTS V. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA; 1:23-CV-04516-VMC). SLF REPRESENTS CLIENTS CHALLENGING THE PHASE OUT OF HYDROFLUOROCARBONS, A COMMON REFRIGERANT FOUND IN CONDITIONERS AND REFRIGERATORS, AS MANDATED UNDER THE AMERICAN INNOVATION AND MANUFACTURING (AIM) ACT. CONGRESS ENACTED THE AIM ACT IN 2020. THIS MATTER CONCLUDED IN FY24. KNIGHT, ET AL. V. THE METROPOLITAN GOV'T OF NASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON COUNTY (MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE; CASE 3:20-CV-00922). SLF REPRESENTS PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS CHALLENGING NASHVILLE'S SIDEWALK ORDINANCE WHICH PLACES UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONDITIONS ON THE ABILITY TO OBTAIN A BUILDING PERMIT. THIS MATTER CONCLUDED IN FY24. SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION V. NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION (NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA; CASE 1:23-CV-03819-LLM). SLF FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST NARA FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND TO A FOIA REQUEST SEEKING EMAILS FROM WHEN THEN VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN USED THREE PERSONAL PSEUDONYM EMAIL ACCOUNTS TO FORWARD GOVERNMENT INFORMATION AND DISCUSS GOVERNMENT BUSINESS WITH HIS SON, HUNTER BIDEN, AND OTHERS. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE, ET AL. V. UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO (DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO; CASE 1:24-CV-DHU-JMR). SLF FILED A FIRST AMENDMENT LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE AND TURNING POINT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO AGAINST THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO FOR CHARGING SIGNIFICANT SECURITY FEES FOR HOSTING RILEY GAINES TO DISCUSS MEN COMPETING IN WOMEN'S SPORTS. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. HORWITZ V. U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE (MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE; CASE 3:24-CV-1180). SLF REPRESENTS AN ATTORNEY IN TENNESSEE IN BRINGING A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE COURT TO RESOLVE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A RULE GOVERNING ATTORNEY SPEECH. THIS MATTER IS PENDING. SAVE AMERICAS K12 SCHOOLS PROJECT. SLF CONTINUED ITS WORK TO SAVE AMERICA'S K-12 PUBLIC SCHOOLS. SLF IS ENGAGING IN DIRECT LITIGATION, FILING ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS, AND TRAINING AMERICA'S PARENTS ON THEIR RIGHTS AND THOSE OF THEIR CHILDREN. RECLAIMING CIVIL LIBERTIES. SLF SUBMITTED PUBLIC COMMENTS TO THE USDA REGARDING THEIR PROPOSALS TO ENGAGE IN ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS THAT DISCRIMINATE BASED ON SKIN COLOR. RESTORING CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCE. SLF FILED A PETITION TO AMEND OR REPEAL A 2008 RULE ISSUED BY NOAA IMPOSING A 10-KNOT SPEET LIMIT ON BOATS OVER 65- FEET IN DESIGNATED WATERS IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN. ENDING ILLEGAL STUDENT SURVEYS. SLF SUBMITTED THE COUNTRY'S FIRST REQUEST TO A SATE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO INVESTIGATE VIOLATIONS OF AND ENFORCE PRIVACY LAWS THAT PROHIBIT SCHOOLS FROM COLLECTING STUDENT' PRIVATE INFORMATION WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT. THE INVESTIGATION IS PENDING. 1A PROJECT. SLF CONTINUED ITS WORK ON ITS 1A PROJECT (FORMERLY THE STUDENT FREEDOM AND SAFETY PROJECT) TO PROVIDE LEGAL COUNSEL AND ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF

Source: Form 990 for the year ending June 30, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Legitimacy checks

  1. Is it registered with the IRS? Passed.

    Listed in the IRS master file of tax-exempt organizations as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization.

    Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  2. Has the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status? Passed.

    Not on the IRS automatic revocation list.

    Source: Automatic revocation of exemption list, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  3. Are donations tax-deductible? Passed.

    On the IRS list of organizations eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions.

    Source: Publication 78 data: organizations eligible for tax-deductible contributions, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  4. Is it keeping up with its IRS filings? Passed.

    Most recent return on file covers the year ending June 2025.

    Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  5. How long has it been tax-exempt? Passed.

    Recognized by the IRS since February 1976.

    Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  6. Is it in good standing with state regulators? Passed.

    Not on California's list of charities barred from soliciting. Other states are not yet checked.

    Source: May Not Operate or Solicit for Charitable Purposes list, California Attorney General, Registry of Charities and Fundraisers, file dated October 21, 2026.

Ratings and checks are our reading of public records, using the published method. They are not a statement about anyone's honesty. If you work for this organization, you can send corrections or results, confirm you want gifts through Veridonate, or ask to be removed from giving.