Pacific Legal Foundation
Public records show a registered, tax-exempt organization in good standing.
What it says it does
Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) litigates nationwide to secure all Americans' inalienable rights to live responsibly and productively in their pursuit of happiness. See Schedule O for full mission.
- Income
- $31.6 million
- Spending
- $35.5 million
- Spent on programs
- 82%
- Reserves
- 34.9 months of spending
- Largest source of income
- donations and private grants, 83%
- Employees
- 180
- Volunteers
- 16
- Highest pay
- $755,869, president & ceo
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: 74 out of 100. Higher than 59% of charities in its peer group (crime and legal services, $10m to $100m).
Reserves
35 of 35Spendable reserves would cover 34.9 months of spending.
Debt
20 of 20It owes 7% of what it owns.
Living within its means
4 of 15Spending exceeded income by 12% of income.
Income trend
0 of 15Income fell 34% on the year before.
Spending floor
15 of 1581% of spending went to programs and raising each dollar of donations cost 10 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
Strong: 100 out of 100. Higher than 30% of charities in its peer group (crime and legal services, $10m to $100m).
Independent board
25 of 2515 of 15 voting board members are independent.
Conflict of interest policy
15 of 15Has a written conflict of interest policy.
Whistleblower policy
8 of 8Has a written whistleblower policy.
Record keeping policy
7 of 7Has a written policy on keeping and destroying records.
Board minutes
5 of 5Keeps minutes of board meetings.
Board sees the tax return
10 of 10Gave the board a copy of this return before filing it.
Pay set independently
5 of 5Sets its chief executive's pay through independent review and comparison.
Independent check of accounts
15 of 15Its accounts were audited by an independent accountant.
No reported misuse
10 of 10Reports 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 (1)
- $28.9 million spent. Each year, PLF represents hundreds of Americans, free of charge, who seek to improve their lives but are stymied by government. We give them their day in court to vindicate their rights and set a lasting precedent to protect everyone else. See Schedule O for a complete list of cases litigated during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. PLF attorneys directly represented clients in the following cases furthering the Foundation's overarching mission to protect and enhance individual liberty. The cases further the goals of individual rights and liberty in the realms of property rights, separation of powers, equality under the law, and economic opportunity. In all cases, actions attributed to PLF were done by PLF attorneys properly admitted to each jurisdiction. Property Rights: A society cannot flourish and individuals cannot advance their private interests without individual rights to create and productively use property. PLF litigates to secure the right to the productive and ordinary use of land; prevent governments from taking property; fight unconstitutional or unlawful regulatory requirements; promote balance in environmental laws; and stop unreasonable searches and seizures. 835 Hinesburg Road LLC v. South Burlington, Vermont. 835 Hinesburg Road, LLC, is challenging a city's designation of a portion of its land as open space "Habitat Blocks." The ordinance that created the Habitat Blocks categorically classifies some of the owner's land as unbuildable, and the city rejected the owner's development proposal. Yet when the owner sued the city for regulatory taking, the district court dismissed the case on the theory that the case is not ripe because the city retains discretion to approve some development in the future. PLF represented the owner on appeal to the Second Circuit to argue that federal courts should be as receptive to civil rights claims based on property ownership as they are with other types of civil rights claims. The Second Circuit affirmed. PLF filed a petition for writ of certiorari. The Court denied PLF's petition, thus attorneys fees cannot be awarded. Beeman, et al. v. Muskegon County Treasurer. PLF represents multiple victims of tax foreclosure, arguing that Muskegon County violated the state and federal constitutions by denying former property owners the surplus proceeds from the auction of their tax-foreclosed properties. The County refuses to pay the surplus proceeds because the owners missed an administrative deadline for submitting a claim form, despite filing timely judicial motions for return of their surplus. The case seeks to secure due process for property owners when they claim the surplus equity value of their tax-foreclosed homes, which PLF's Supreme Court victory in Tyler v. Hennepin County entitles them to receive. The Takings Clause affirmatively requires government to pay for what it takes; it cannot avoid that duty by creating a claim process designed to minimize payment of just compensation for taken property. PLF petitioned the Michigan Supreme Court to hear the case, and the court denied the petition. PLF petitioned the United States Supreme Court where it is fully briefed and awaits a conference date. Because the litigation is ongoing, it is premature to seek fees. Benedetti v. County of Marin, California. Before they may build a family home on the rural property they have owned for years, the Marin County's land use plan requires the Benedetti family-brothers Arron and Arthur who inherited the estate of their father, Willie-to agree that they will be "actively and directly engaged in agriculture and to record a restrictive covenant that they and all future owners of the home will be farmers or ranchers forever. These requirements place unconstitutional conditions on the Benedettis liberty and property rights. PLF filed a lawsuit on their behalf in state court, survived a demurrer, and litigated on the merits. The trial court held in favor of the county. PLF appealed to the Ninth Circuit where the case has been briefed and argued and awaits a decision. Because litigation is ongoing, it is premature to seek fees. Bordelon v. Baldwin County, Alabama. PLF represents Mike Bordelon and Breezy Shores, LLC, who are developers who intended to build a three-story, 14-unit residential rental building. After obtaining the necessary permits and starting construction, the county bowed to community pressure and issued a Stop Work Order. The revocation of the building permit caused economic harm and destroyed the owner's reasonable investment-backed expectations, and the character of the government action differed little from a physical invasion. As such, the order caused a regulatory taking for which the county must pay just compensation. The developers won in the trial court and the county appealed. PLF looks to preserve their victory in the Eleventh Circuit. Victory! The appellate court upheld the district court decision in all respects, such that the developers will receive just compensation for the taking of their property. It denied the county's petition for rehearing, leaving the victory intact. The County filed a petition for writ of certiorari, which was later denied. PLF sought $61,718 in attorneys' fees in a pending motion. Chinook Landing v. United States. PLF represents Chinook Landing LLC in a quiet title action against the federal government. The late John Lund (who owned Chinook Landing, which took title under Lund's probate) brought a quiet title and takings case against the Bonneville Power Association, a federal power marketing agency in the Pacific Northwest. The district court dismissed the case, holding that the case was filed outside the applicable statute of limitations. PLF took over the case on appeal in the Ninth Circuit to argue that the Quiet Title Act's statute of limitations is not triggered by the recording of an easement, the federal government does not have an implicit access easement when the governing deed allows for an ex
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
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.
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 November 6, 2026.
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.
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.
How long has it been tax-exempt? Passed.
Recognized by the IRS since June 1973.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
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 November 4, 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.