Second Circuit affirms New York AG subpoenas preclude VDARE’s First Amendment claims

MANHATTAN (CN) — A New York federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the alt-right nonprofit organization VDARE was precluded from arguing the New York attorney general violated its First Amendment rights against viewpoint discrimination by seeking info on contractors and vendors through subpoena when a state court already ordered compliance with the production request.

VDARE is an anti-immigration website and foundation that has been designated a white nationalist hate group by organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League.

New York Attorney General Letitia James began investigating the organization in 2022, issuing subpoenas seeking documents concerning VDARE’s governance, financial operations and regulatory disclosures. VDARE then filed suit in the Northern District of New York in December 2022, accusing the attorney general’s subpoena of violating the group’s rights of free speech and association under the First Amendment and New York Constitution.

“On appeal, VDARE principally challenges the district court’s claim preclusion analysis, asserting that the state court’s order did not satisfy the elements of New York’s res judicata test and that, in any event, general principles of equity precluded application of res judicata in this case. We disagree,” U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Sullivan wrote in the Second Circuit panel’s opinion. “Because we conclude that the district court correctly dismissed the action on res judicatagrounds, we affirm the district court’s judgment and dismiss as moot VDARE’s challenge to the district court’s denial of its request for a preliminary injunction.”

The doctrine of res judicata bars litigants from bringing claims that have already been decided in another court.

Here, the Second Circuit concluded that VDARE’s federal complaint was properly barred in light of a judgment in a special proceeding in the New York Supreme Court, pursuant to state law, to compel VDARE to comply with the subpoena.

U.S. Circuit Judge Alison J. Nathan and U.S. District Judge Ramon E. Reyes, sitting by designation from the Eastern District of New York — both appointees of Joe Biden — joined Sullivan, a Donald Trump appointee, on the panel.

The panel noted in a footnote of the opinion that the parties continue to litigate VDARE’s compliance with the subpoena in state court.

“Most recently, on Nov. 17, 2025, the state court reaffirmed that VDARE’s failure to produce 556 documents in an accessible format has resulted in a finding of contempt against it and ‘an ongoing daily fine’ at a rate of $1,000 per day,” the three-judge panel wrote.

In an appeals brief, VDARE had argued the First Amendment protections for anonymous contractors overwhelmingly necessitate a stay of the enforcement of the New York attorney general’s subpoena, “though it should be entirely enjoined on account of the retaliatory motive.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center describes VDARE as providing “a crucial bridge between the more mainstream anti-immigrant movement, including major players in the Republican Party, and the white nationalist fringe.”

“Even if the attorney general were acting in good faith, the rights of the third parties to speak and associate anonymously with a political organization like VDARE must prevail against a subpoena that infringes on these rights,” the group wrote.

James brought a civil action against VDARE in September 2025, accusing the far-right activists of looting corporate assets into a network of out-of-state corporations in VDARE’s Peter and Lydia Brimelow’s control and misusing the funds to purchase a medieval-style castle in West Virginia.

The civil suit asked a New York state judge to ban the Brimelows from serving as directors of any New York nonprofit, mirroring the tactics of the New York attorney general’s yearslong court battle with the National Rifle Association.

Three years before the suit was filed, James’ office issued a subpoena seeking various documents concerning VDARE’s operations, including documents that would identify “VDARE’s current and former independent contractors” and disclose information relating to transactions with its vendors.

VDARE claimed the subpoena was entirely pretextual and that the New York state prosecutors targeted it as a part of the office’s efforts to “limit” VDARE’s viewpoints on immigration and “speech with which she disagrees.”

Peter Brimelow sued The New York Times in 2020 over defamation regarding articles characterizing him and the content on his VDARE website as “white nationalist,” “white supremacist” and “antisemitic,” but the $5 million case was thrown out by a Manhattan federal judge who found newspaper was entitled to base its description of Brimelow in one article “on its own evaluation” of his writings and public comments and other articles “stated only non-actionable opinion regarding VDARE.”

The lower court’s dismissal of the defamation suit was later affirmed by the Second Circuit. In 2022, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

Follow @jruss_jruss