The American people have every right to know who is funding their candidates and what agendas those backers represent. A growing web of financial connections now links a controversial Muslim civil rights network—long scrutinized for its ties to radical organizations—to one of the largest donors backing a Democratic Socialist mayoral candidate.

At the center of this story is the Unity and Justice Fund, a political action committee that pumped $120,000 into the campaign of Zohran Mamdani, a self-proclaimed socialist running for New York City mayor. What raises immediate concern is not just the amount but the deeper affiliations behind that check.

The Unity and Justice Fund shares addresses and leadership personnel with CAIR Action, a political arm operating under the broader umbrella of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. CAIR, which has long positioned itself as a Muslim civil rights organization, has also faced years of scrutiny over its alleged radical ties.

Despite claims that CAIR Action is legally distinct from the non-profit CAIR, the overlapping addresses and shared individuals blur the lines. This looks less like a separation and more like a shell game, designed to mask political operations behind a non-profit veil.

Additional PACs linked to the same network are involved as well. Unity Lab PAC, which donated $23,500 to Mamdani’s PAC, is run by an individual who also operates as a spokesperson for a regional chapter of the parent organization. These interconnections raise red flags about coordination and transparency.

Meanwhile, the Unity and Justice Fund is run by a former chapter leader of the parent group, who also serves as treasurer for its political wing. This is not mere coincidence. It reflects a deliberate strategy to create political influence pipelines using groups that purport to be civil rights advocates.

Radical anti-Israel activist Linda Sarsour openly celebrated the influence of these PACs in Mamdani’s campaign, boasting that a large majority of his financial backing came from Muslim-American donors mobilized by these very organizations.

That statement alone should have set off alarms among ethics watchdogs and campaign-finance authorities. Yet, the only action taken by the involved parties was to add a legal disclaimer—hardly the kind of meaningful transparency the public deserves.

This network of political activity is also housed at the same address as the national office of the civil rights organization, further cementing suspicions that these entities are working hand-in-hand despite the technical distinctions on paper.

This is more than just politics as usual. It’s a sophisticated funding apparatus working to shape U.S. elections using money from groups that have faced serious questions about their allegiances and activities.

The background of these groups is not irrelevant. Leaders of their affiliated networks have previously been convicted of financing foreign terrorist organizations. Several high-profile trials have exposed the extent to which some of these so-called charities were functioning as financial channels for radical Islamist movements.

Yet these same networks are now pouring funds into the campaign of a mayoral candidate with openly radical positions, including praise for individuals convicted of funding terrorism. That should be deeply troubling to every American.

One such case involved a now-defunct charity whose directors were sentenced for funneling money to Hamas. During that trial, the civil rights group connected to the Mamdani campaign was named as an unindicted co-conspirator.

Even more disturbing is Mamdani’s own record. Years ago, he released a song in which he explicitly praised the convicted directors of that radical charity, telling listeners to “look ’em up.” That’s not a slip—it’s a declaration.

The message being sent here is that it’s perfectly acceptable to glamorize convicted criminals, accept funding from groups under investigation, and advance a political platform that aligns with far-left ideologies and radical sympathies.

This entire operation represents a gross manipulation of campaign finance laws, exploiting nonprofit protections to funnel massive political donations into the coffers of socialist candidates.

The American people are being kept in the dark about who is really backing some of the most extreme voices rising in today’s political ranks. And when those backers have controversial, even dangerous, affiliations, the implications become urgent.

This isn’t about smearing one religion or community. This is about national security, campaign integrity, and the need for full transparency in our electoral system.

Every dollar entering a political campaign should be traceable, accountable, and free from the shadow of extremism. When we allow dark-money operations tied to radical networks to go unchecked, we threaten the very foundations of our democracy.

The candidate in question has not refuted the source of the donations, nor has he returned the money. That silence is as telling as any endorsement. It signals complicity or, at the very least, indifference to the origins of his campaign’s financial backing.

Congress must act. Campaign finance rules must be updated to prevent nonprofits from serving as political fronts. Audits must be conducted. PACs with suspicious affiliations must be shut down.

Voters deserve to know who’s trying to buy influence in American cities—and for what purpose. In this case, the answer appears to be power cloaked in radicalism.