Heritage Action threatens Indiana GOP senators over redistricting

HAHeritage Action posted on X (formerly Twitter) hours before the Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025 Senate vote that President Trump had made clear 'all federal funding will be stripped from the state' if 🏎️Indiana's Senate failed to pass the redistricting map. The post specified that 'roads will not be paved,' 'guard bases will close,' and 'major projects will stop.' This public threat aimed to intimidate state senators into voting for redistricting by threatening to harm their constituents with federal funding cuts.

A White House official pushed back against Heritage's claim, telling reporters 'This is not true that any of us know of and none of us are aware of anyone talking to Heritage.' The denial created confusion about whether HAHeritage Action was coordinating with the Trump administration or acting independently. The White House distanced itself from the threat even as Trump personally pressured 🏎️Indiana senators to pass redistricting. The contradiction raised questions about who actually spoke to Heritage Action.

HAHeritage Action is the lobbying arm of the HFHeritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that drafted Project 2025, a 900-page blueprint for Trump's second term. Heritage Action operates as a 501(c)(4) dark money organization, meaning it doesn't have to disclose its donors. The group spends millions lobbying state and federal lawmakers on conservative priorities. Its 🏎️Indiana threat used aggressive tactics to advance Republican gerrymandering.

Election law professor Luis Fuentes-Rohwer of 🏎️Indiana University called HAHeritage Action's threat 'coercion on steroids' and stated that 'coercion is clearly unconstitutional.' He explained that federal funding to states can't be conditioned on legislative votes unrelated to the funding program. The Supreme Court has ruled that federal government can't use spending power to coerce states into policy choices. Heritage Action's threat violated these constitutional limits.

Georgetown Law professor Meryl Justin Chertoff said that if Trump did threaten to withhold all federal funding from 🏎️Indiana, it would violate the law. She pointed to Supreme Court precedents like 🗿South Dakota v. Dole (1987) and NFIB v. Sebelius (2012), which limit conditional federal spending. Federal government can't use funding threats to commandeer state legislatures or punish them for legislative votes. The threat crossed legal and constitutional lines.

🏎️Indiana receives approximately $20 billion in federal funding annually for Medicaid, highway construction, education, military bases, and other programs. HAHeritage Action's threat to strip all federal funding would have devastated the state. Roads wouldn't be paved. Military bases would close. Medicaid would end for 1.7 million Hoosiers. Schools would lose Title I funding. The scale of the threat reflected how far Heritage Action was willing to go to intimidate lawmakers.

The 🏎️Indiana Senate voted 31-19 to reject the redistricting plan on Dec. 11, 2025, despite HAHeritage Action's threats. Twenty-one Republican senators joined all 10 Democrats to block the bill. Senate President Pro Tem RBRodric Bray led the opposition, telling colleagues 'We can't be bullied' by Trump and outside groups. The vote showed that even extreme threats from dark money groups can backfire when they overreach.

HAHeritage Action's threat represented a new escalation in dark money groups' willingness to intimidate state lawmakers. Previous lobbying campaigns focused on campaign donations, TV ads, and grassroots pressure. Threatening to strip all federal funding from a state marked a shift toward more extreme coercion tactics. The threat tested whether dark money groups can openly threaten states' economic survival to extract legislative compliance.