The Interior Department is terminating agreements with over three dozen outside groups it says no longer align with the priorities of the current administration or deliver a clear benefit to the American public. The move, part of a broader Trump administration push to root out wasteful spending and misaligned contracts across the federal government, will redirect roughly $4 million that would have flowed to organizations tied to progressive causes.
An internal review of the department uncovered some 2,000 active contracts with outside groups. Department officials determined that many of those partnerships had drifted far from anything resembling responsible land stewardship or public-lands access, and into territory that looks a lot more like subsidized progressive advocacy.
Matthew Middleton, the department's principal deputy communications director and director of research, told Fox News Digital exactly what drove the decision:
"Under President Trump and Secretary Burgum, the Department of the Interior is taking decisive action to ensure its partnerships and resources support the priorities of this administration and the interests of the American people."
Fox News got the first look at the Interior Department press release announcing the cuts. The department framed the action plainly: it is "ending partnerships with groups that no longer represent the priorities of the American people."
Three organizations stand out among the groups losing their Interior Department partnerships, and each one illustrates a different flavor of mission drift.
The Hispanic Access Foundation, led by president and CEO Maite Arce, has openly promoted scholarships for illegal immigrant students. One linked program was described as a "NEW HAF SCHOLARSHIP TO HELP DACA AND UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS." In a 2021 press release, Arce identified "Dreamers" as among the "most vulnerable communities" during the coronavirus pandemic, citing their "limited resources." She went further:
"When DACA was first established, it provided Dreamers the ability to go to school, have a job, have a driver's license, etc. Now, many Dreamers are in school, have a degree, or are serving in the military. They are a part of our community, and contribute to our country's prosperity."
Whatever one thinks of DACA policy, the question for taxpayers is straightforward: why was the Interior Department, an agency charged with managing federal lands and natural resources, funding an organization whose public advocacy centers on immigration status and illegal immigrant scholarships?
Conservation International, another group on the list, drew the department's attention for a different reason. The Interior Department pointed to the organization's stated goal of phasing out fossil fuels altogether. For an administration that has made American energy dominance a central policy objective, bankrolling a group working to eliminate the very industry the administration seeks to expand is not a partnership, it is a contradiction.
The administration has been making the case that leadership failures in Washington extend well beyond land management. Secretary Doug Burgum has pushed a broader argument that government dysfunction is a choice, not a condition, and that the Interior Department under this administration intends to make different choices.
Then there is The Cultural Landscape Foundation. Fox News reported that the group holds a master cooperative agreement with the National Park Service "to conduct a variety of educational and cultural support activities." That sounds benign enough on paper.
But the foundation has also opposed several administration initiatives. It sued over changes at the Kennedy Center. It criticized plans for a White House ballroom. And it has publicly highlighted cultural landscapes and historic sites it claims are threatened by administration actions.
In other words, a group receiving federal partnership benefits was simultaneously using its platform to challenge the very administration funding it. That is not stewardship. That is taxpayer-funded opposition research.
The pattern across all three groups is consistent. Each one drifted from any plausible public-lands or resource-management mission into advocacy that directly conflicts with the administration's stated priorities, on immigration, energy, and executive authority.
The Interior Department's action does not exist in a vacuum. The Trump administration has launched a wider initiative to scrutinize government waste, fraud, abuse, and the sprawling web of contracts that accumulate across federal agencies over time. The fact that a single department found 2,000 active contracts with outside groups suggests the problem runs deep.
The administration has been reshaping personnel and priorities across multiple agencies. The recent appointment of ICE veteran David Venturella to lead that agency reflects the same instinct: put people in charge who share the mission, and cut loose those who don't.
At the EPA, administrator Lee Zeldin announced organizational improvements he said would save $300 million annually. The Interior Department's $4 million in redirected funds is smaller by comparison, but the principle is the same. Every dollar flowing to a group that opposes the administration's energy policy or promotes illegal immigrant scholarships is a dollar not spent on the public-lands access and responsible stewardship the department exists to provide.
Middleton made that point directly:
"Interior will continue to invest in partnerships that expand access to public lands, promote responsible stewardship, and deliver tangible benefits to the American people."
That is a reasonable standard. If a group cannot meet it, the partnership should end. The question is not whether these organizations have a right to advocate for their causes, they do. The question is whether taxpayers should be forced to fund that advocacy through federal contracts dressed up as "partnerships."
This kind of housecleaning has been a recurring theme. The administration has not hesitated to withdraw support from figures and organizations that don't fit the mission. The withdrawal of Scott Socha's National Park Service nomination earlier this year showed the same willingness to act when alignment breaks down.
Congress, meanwhile, has been doing its part. The House reconciliation bill funding ICE and Border Patrol through 2029 reflects a legislative branch that is backing the executive's enforcement priorities with real money, not just rhetoric.
The progressive groups losing their Interior Department contracts will almost certainly frame this as an attack on civil society, environmental protection, or cultural preservation. Expect the usual language about "chilling effects" and "political litmus tests."
But the facts tell a simpler story. The Interior Department reviewed its contracts. It found groups promoting illegal immigrant scholarships, groups working to eliminate fossil fuels, and groups actively suing the administration, all while drawing on federal partnership agreements. It ended those partnerships.
That is not a purge. That is management.
Taxpayers do not owe progressive organizations a permanent seat at the federal funding table. If these groups want to advocate for open borders, fossil-fuel phase-outs, or lawsuits against the White House, they are free to do so, on their own dime.