Three US House committees have formally accused ActBlue, one of America's largest online political fundraising platforms, of systematically failing to prevent illegal foreign donations — with newly obtained documents indicating that employees were explicitly directed to accept contributions despite multiple warning signs. The joint interim staff report, released on 18 September 2026, represents the third such report in an investigation that began in late 2024.

What the Committees Allege

The House Judiciary, House Administration, and House Oversight and Government Reform committees released the joint report, which describes internal supervisory instructions telling fraud analysts to 'give the donor the benefit of the doubt' — even when multiple foreign indicators were present. In some documented instances, employees were directed to approve donations they had previously rejected over suspected foreign involvement.

One flagged case involved a donor whose profile raised several concerns. An employee described the contributor as having 'a few red flags, such as IP/billing mismatch and a concerning IP provider name, a foreign credit card, an odd email domain, and [is] connected to other rejected users via browser fingerprint.' Despite those signals, the contribution was accepted on the reasoning that ActBlue 'can't say for sure that this is fraud', according to the committees' account.

In a separate case, an analyst flagged 'an odd pattern of small donations to the [Kamala] Harris campaign using prepaid cards.' Another employee reportedly deemed those contributions 'good to accept.'

Passport Verification Gaps

The committees also challenged ActBlue's passport verification system, which the platform had presented as a safeguard against illegal foreign contributions. According to the report, the system did not actually require a valid US passport number, raising questions about whether the check offered any meaningful barrier to foreign donors.

Fraud Controls Reportedly Weakened Twice in 2024

The latest report follows two earlier interim staff reports on ActBlue's compliance practices. The committees allege that ActBlue weakened its fraud-prevention standards on two separate occasions in 2024, reducing the number of donations subjected to manual review. The platform had also seen subsequent departures from its legal and compliance team during this period.

Questions Over Candour With Congress

The committees said ActBlue had previously assured them it had supplied all information relevant to the inquiry — an assurance they subsequently challenged after an 2 April 2026 New York Times article cited documents they say were never provided. According to the committees' account of that article, the newspaper quoted an employee resignation letter and internal messages concerning alleged fraud and retaliation against whistleblowers.

The report also noted that ActBlue's outside counsel, Dana Remus — former Biden White House counsel — had reportedly drafted memoranda raising concerns about the platform's handling of foreign contributions. Those memoranda, as described by the committees, concluded that chief executive Regina Wallace-Jones may have misled Congress about the review process, and that ActBlue's acceptance of illegal foreign contributions appeared to be 'knowing and willful.'

The release did not include a response from ActBlue, nor did it specify the total value or number of contributions determined to be illegal. The findings described are the committees' allegations; the investigation remains ongoing.

How ActBlue responds — and whether the findings trigger regulatory action or referrals — is expected to define the next phase of this inquiry.