Who founded blexit and how is it organized legally?
Executive summary
Blexit refers to two related but distinct initiatives: an original Minneapolis-based grassroots movement launched by Me’Lea (Me’La) Connelly in 2016 focused on Black economic independence, and a later, separate organization launched in 2018 by conservative commentator Candace Owens (with Brandon Tatum) that organized as a formal nonprofit and positioned itself as a political outreach effort (the “BLEXIT Foundation”) [1] [2] [3]. The Owens/Tatum vehicle incorporated as a tax-exempt 501(c) nonprofit and has worked closely with conservative groups, including a 2023 merger/partnership with Turning Point USA, while the original Connelly movement was decentralized and objected to Owens’s use of the name [4] [3] [5].
1. Origins: the Minneapolis grassroots Blexit and its founder
The earliest, community-rooted Blexit began after the 2016 police killing of Philando Castile and was founded by Me’Lea (sometimes styled Me’La) Connelly in Minneapolis as a movement aimed at Black economic independence through boycotts, investment in Black institutions and civil disobedience; that group described itself as nonprofit and grassroots rather than a centralized branded foundation [1] [6]. Connelly’s Blexit arose from community meetings and activism in 2016 and explicitly framed itself around economic resistance and supporting Black-owned businesses [1] [6].
2. Candace Owens and Brandon Tatum: a separate BLEXIT Foundation with formal nonprofit status
In October 2018 Candace Owens launched her own campaign using the BLEXIT name and soon formed the BLEXIT Foundation with former police officer Brandon Tatum as a co‑founder; that effort was organized as a formal nonprofit and publicly presented itself as a 501(c) promoting school choice, entrepreneurship, criminal‑justice reform messaging and conservative civic education for minority communities [2] [7] [4]. GuideStar and other profiles list the BLEXIT Foundation’s programs and 501(c) status claims, and Owens repeatedly acted as the public face of that organizational vehicle [4] [7].
3. Legal and branding clash: decentralized movement vs. trademarked foundation
The two projects collided when Connelly’s original Blexit objected to Owens’s use of the name; Connelly said her group had been decentralized and had not pursued trademarking, but accused Owens of appropriating the name and filed cease‑and‑desist notices and threatened legal action after Owens moved to trademark BLEXIT [5] [1]. Reporting shows the original Minnesota group publicly distancing itself from Owens’s partisan messaging, and noted that the dispute centered on both branding and fundamentally different missions [1] [5].
4. Organizational ties, funding, and political orientation of the Owens/Tatum BLEXIT
Investigations and watchdog reporting have shown the Owens/Tatum BLEXIT Foundation received significant backing and close operational ties to conservative infrastructure, with major donors and donor‑advised funds identified by critics and reporting that the foundation was “powered” by Turning Point USA—an affiliation later formalized with a 2023 merge/partnership announcement—and that wealthy conservative backers played a role in financing the foundation’s activities [8] [9] [3]. Supporters say the foundation’s nonprofit form allows education‑focused outreach; critics and some reporters argue the funding and TPUSA links signal a partisan mobilization of minority voters toward conservative politics [8] [9].
5. What is clear and what remains opaque
It is well documented that Me’Lea Connelly founded the original 2016 community Blexit and that Candace Owens (with Brandon Tatum) launched a separate BLEXIT Foundation in 2018 organized as a 501(c), and that the two entities have clashed publicly over name and mission [1] [2] [5]. Less transparent in publicly available reporting are full, audited donor lists and the granular legal filings around trademarks and any final settlement terms; GuideStar notes gaps in IRS filings for the foundation at times, and watchdog reporting has uncovered many but not necessarily all funders, leaving some questions about long‑term governance and fund flows [4] [9].