ActBlue Faces Subpoenas in Shocking Fraud Probe

Written by Timothy Bennett.

On June 24, 2025, the House Judiciary, Oversight, and Administration Committees escalated their investigation into ActBlue, a major Democratic fundraising platform, by issuing subpoenas to two key officials. The probe centers on allegations that ActBlue permitted foreign actors to funnel illicit donations to Democratic campaigns during the 2024 election cycle, raising serious questions about the integrity of online political fundraising. This development marks a significant step in addressing potential vulnerabilities in campaign finance systems, with implications for electoral transparency and national security.

Subpoenas Target ActBlue Officials

The subpoenas, issued by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, House Oversight Chairman James Comer, and House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, compel testimony from Alyssa Twomey, former ActBlue Vice President of Customer Service, and a senior workflow specialist. Both officials were initially offered the opportunity to participate in voluntary transcribed interviews but declined, citing an ongoing U.S. Justice Department investigation into ActBlue. The committees rejected this excuse, asserting that congressional oversight must proceed independently of executive branch inquiries.

The deadline for the officials to appear for testimony is July 15, 2025. The committees’ letter accompanying the subpoenas emphasized a clear legislative purpose: to ensure that online fundraising platforms do not facilitate fraudulent or illegal donations, particularly from foreign sources. This action follows months of scrutiny, with lawmakers uncovering evidence that ActBlue’s internal practices may have enabled such misconduct, prompting a broader examination of campaign finance safeguards.

Evidence of Weakened Fraud Protections

Investigators have uncovered troubling indications that ActBlue relaxed its fraud-prevention measures during the 2024 election cycle, despite awareness of attempted illicit donations from foreign actors. Internal documents reveal that the platform revised its fraud-prevention standards twice in 2024, adopting a more lenient approach. For instance, ActBlue’s training guide instructed new fraud-prevention staff to “look for reasons to accept contributions” rather than rigorously scrutinizing potentially suspicious donations, a policy that critics argue opened the door to abuse.

Further, the committees found that ActBlue’s senior fraud-prevention staff, including Twomey, acknowledged multiple vulnerabilities in the platform’s systems. These weaknesses reportedly allowed bad actors to bypass safeguards, enabling illicit contributions. A 2024 internal assessment by ActBlue estimated that relaxed standards led to 14 to 28 additional fraudulent donations monthly. The platform’s failure to require Card Verification Value (CVV) codes for all transactions until late 2024 exacerbated these risks, as CVV verification is a standard anti-fraud measure in online financial systems.

The scale of ActBlue’s operations amplifies these concerns. In the 2023–2024 election cycle, the platform raised over $3.8 billion for Democratic candidates and causes, processing millions of transactions. The sheer volume of donations, combined with lax oversight, raises the specter of undetected foreign interference, particularly from nations like China, Iran, or Russia, which lawmakers fear may exploit such platforms to influence U.S. elections.

Broader Implications for Campaign Finance

The ActBlue investigation highlights systemic challenges in regulating online political fundraising, a sector that has grown exponentially. Since its founding in 2004, ActBlue has become a cornerstone of Democratic fundraising, enabling grassroots donors to contribute seamlessly to candidates and causes. Its success, however, has made it a potential target for exploitation. The practice of “smurfing,” where large donations are broken into smaller, unreported contributions to evade Federal Election Commission (FEC) scrutiny, has emerged as a particular concern. A 2024 analysis by the House Administration Committee identified hundreds of donations attributed to low-income individuals, far exceeding their financial capacity, suggesting possible straw-donor schemes.

Legislative efforts to address these issues are underway. In September 2024, Chairman Steil introduced the Secure Handling of Internet Electronic Donations (SHIELD) Act, which mandates CVV verification and bans contributions via prepaid gift cards, a common tool for fraudulent donations. The bill, passed by the House Administration Committee, reflects growing bipartisan recognition of the need for stronger campaign finance protections. Additionally, 19 state attorneys general have launched parallel investigations into ActBlue, signaling widespread concern about its practices.

The probe also coincides with internal turmoil at ActBlue. In February 2025, seven senior officials, including Twomey, resigned amid allegations of internal retaliation and mismanagement. The organization’s last remaining lawyer was placed on leave, leaving its legal team in disarray. These developments have fueled skepticism about ActBlue’s ability to address fraud effectively, particularly as it faces simultaneous congressional and DOJ scrutiny.

Our Take

The subpoenas issued to ActBlue officials represent a critical juncture in safeguarding the integrity of U.S. elections. The evidence of weakened fraud protections, coupled with the platform’s central role in Democratic fundraising, demands rigorous oversight to prevent foreign interference and ensure compliance with federal law. While ActBlue’s cooperation with investigators could restore trust, its history of lax standards raises legitimate concerns about systemic vulnerabilities. Lawmakers must prioritize legislative reforms, such as the SHIELD Act, to close loopholes and protect the democratic process from exploitation.