Which organizations are funding the No Kings protests and what are their stated goals?

1. Who the mainstream reporting identifies as funders

Major mainstream outlets describe No Kings as a broad coalition of established progressive groups and unions that mobilized resources: Indivisible, 50501, MoveOn, the ACLU, Public Citizen, the American Federation of Teachers and SEIU are repeatedly listed as organizers or key partners, and reporting says funding came from a combination of progressive foundations, labor unions and grassroots donations ^{[1] [2] [5] [6]}.

2. The George Soros / Open Society question and what sources actually say

Conservative outlets and some summaries assert that foundations tied to George Soros funded No Kings; several reports note that Open Society Foundations made multi‑year grants to groups such as Indivisible (often described as a $3 million grant for social‑welfare activities), but both the foundation and allies say the grants were general support to organizations that do many activities and were not explicitly funding a single protest day, and organizers stress that grants oppose violence while supporting democratic mobilization ^{[3] [6] [4]}.

3. What organizers say their goals are

Organizers frame No Kings as a nonviolent, nationwide movement to “defend democracy” and reject authoritarianism — summed up in the slogan “America has No Kings.” Public statements and sites for the movement emphasize safeguarding democratic values, opposing what participants call authoritarian moves by the administration, and coordinating follow‑up tactics like boycotts, local campaigns, and voter mobilization ^{[2] [7] [8] [9]}.

4. Tactics and secondary objectives reported by news outlets

Beyond mass marches, reporting documents a range of coordinated tactics: training in de‑escalation, local direct actions, a targeted Thanksgiving–Cyber Monday boycott against retailers said to enable administration policies, and campaigns aimed at healthcare, immigrant protections and blocking corporate ties to the White House. Organizers describe this as a movement that will shift from mass days to sustained pressure ^{[10] [11] [9]}.

5. Disagreement in the record and competing narratives

Mainstream and progressive outlets portray No Kings as decentralized but broadly supported by long‑standing civic groups and unions ^{[1] [2]}. Conservative and partisan outlets emphasize wealthy philanthropist funding — especially linking Open Society grants to Indivisible — framing the protests as orchestrated rather than grassroots. Independent commentary and some organizers counter that grant dollars were general operating support and that grassroots donations, volunteer mobilization and unions played major logistical roles ^{[3] [4] [6]}.

6. What the sources do not resolve

Available sources do not provide a single itemized ledger showing exactly how much money from which foundations or unions was spent specifically on the October No Kings day of protests, nor do they prove a direct dollar‑for‑day link between any single grant and particular events on October 18; reporting cites grants to coalition partners and notes union and grassroots support, but an explicit transaction‑by‑transaction accounting for the protests is not published in the materials provided ^{[3] [1] [6]}.

7. How funders’ stated goals compare to critics’ claims

Funders and allied organizations present goals as democratic mobilization, nonviolent protest and protecting civil liberties; critics — especially from the right — portray funding as political intervention or as enabling unrest. Both sides have an implicit agenda: organizers want to broaden civic resistance and electoral power ^{[7] [9]}, while critics aim to delegitimize the movement by framing it as externally financed political activism ^{[3] [12]}.

8. Bottom line for readers trying to assess who “paid for” No Kings

Reporting shows a mixed funding picture: coalition groups, unions and grassroots donations provided the operational backbone and publicity for No Kings, and progressive foundations including Open Society Foundations have made significant grants to coalition partners — but available reporting does not produce a single-source financial trail proving that any one donor directly paid for the October protest day itself. Readers should treat assertions of a single mastermind funder as contested and check primary grant announcements and organizations’ public financial disclosures for further detail ^{[2] [3] [4]}.