Pro-Palestine nonprofits seek to block Virginia AG from record access

American Muslims for Palestine hopes to stop a records demand from Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares, who accuses the group of funneling funds to Hamas.

About 75 people gathered outside Vice President Kamala Harris’ March 8, 2024 speech in Phoenix to protest the killing of more than 30,000 Palestinians in Gaza since October. (Joe Duhownik/Courthouse News)

Joe Dodson / September 26, 2025 | Originally posted in Courthouse News Service

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (CN) — A pro-Palestinian nonprofit asked a Virginia-based federal court to block a records demand Friday, claiming it targets activity protected by the Constitution.

The complaint comes one business day before AJP Educational Foundation Inc., also known as American Muslims for Palestine, will appear before a state judge for a Sept. 29 show cause hearing. The court will decide whether to hold the group in contempt for failing to produce 31 documents and answer 12 interrogatory questions for Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares.

Miyares, a Republican seeking reelection in November, launched the investigation into the Falls Church-based nonprofit on Oct. 31, 2023, weeks after Hamas killed 1,195 people and kidnapped more than 200 in Israel.

“The Attorney General’s Office has reason to believe that the organization may be soliciting contributions in the Commonwealth without first having registered with the Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,” Miyares said in a press release. “In addition, the Attorney General will investigate allegations that the organization may have used funds raised for impermissible purposes under state law, including benefitting or providing support to terrorist organizations.”

In a 16-page complaint, the nonprofit wrote that although the probe concerns charitable solicitation laws, Miyares’ demand seeks overly broad information that infringes on its rights. The group argues it is now in compliance with the law and that the request is not narrowly tailored to the demand’s interest.

“The process and scope Attorney General Miyares utilized here shows this is not really about the VDACS form,” Muslim Legal Defense Fund Head of Civil Litigation Christina Jump said in an email. “For two years now, despite never reaching out to AMP and instead going straight to a CID, and never acknowledging AMP’s ongoing compliance with Virginia’s laws ever since, Attorney General Miyares and the AG’s office want what the United States Supreme Court has already said states cannot have.”

The group claims the demand violates its First, Fourth and 14th Amendment rights.

“They simply cannot get information that has constitutional protections, and definitely not without showing their request relates directly to an identified state interest, and puts the least amount of burden on businesses in Virginia,” Jump said. “Here, the AG does neither of those.”

The nonprofit, which describes itself as a grassroots organization educating Americans about Palestine through cultural outreach and advocacy, is seeking injunctive relief to block enforcement of the demand and declaratory relief that it violates its constitutional rights.

Miyares’ demand seeks the group’s donor list, board meeting records and extensive financial documents. The nonprofit stated in its complaint that the request is already chilling support, with partners and donors hesitant to engage due to fear of investigation.

In addition to speech, the nonprofit argues that the demand encroaches on its right to freedom of association. The organization also believes the demand is an example of viewpoint discrimination prohibited by the 14th Amendment.

“Defendant Miyares unlawfully targeted AMP for its speech in support of Palestine, while actively encouraging speech and actions in support of Israel,” the nonprofit wrote. “Defendant Miyares unlawfully used the power of his office to exclude and/or attempts to chill AMP’s speech simply because he disagrees with it.”

Lastly, the group proffers that the demand violates the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.

“Government actors must show that the investigation bears a legitimate purpose, the information sought is relevant, the demand is sufficiently specific and procedural steps,” the nonprofit wrote. “The CID harasses AMP with the improper purpose of targeting AMP for its protected speech and association.”

Local and state courts have denied the nonprofit’s request to stay enforcement of the demand on multiple occasions since 2023. The group has missed various deadlines, including one imposed by the Virginia Court of Appeals in June.

“AMP’s willful disobedience of the court’s unambiguous order directing it to comply with the Attorney General’s CID is yet another link in AMP’s nearly two-year-long chain of tactics employed to forestall compliance with and evade the Attorney General’s lawful investigation into AMP’s charitable solicitation activities,” Miyares wrote in a request for a show cause hearing.

The group is placing hope that the federal court will step in to address the constitutional questions. The U.S. Supreme Court will soon address whether federal courts can review constitutional objections to a state action while related cases are pending in state court, along with whether the party must suffer harm to prompt the review in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin, a case where New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin sought donor names from a faith-based pregnancy center.

The Eastern District Court of Virginia ruled in the nonprofit’s favor in August, dismissing claims brought by American and Israeli citizens accusing the group of aiding and abetting Hamas. U.S. District Court Judge Rossie Alston, a Donald Trump appointee, ruled that the plaintiffs failed to connect the group’s domestic activity with the Oct. 7 attack.

The attorney general’s office did not respond to a request for comment.