Leaked Project 2025 Applications Reveal Far‑Right and Authoritarian Influences Among Applicants

Leaked application files from the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 initiative reveal that dozens of applicants named far‑right or authoritarian thinkers — including Nazi‑era jurist Carl Schmitt — as primary influences on their political views. The dataset, published by the transparency group Distributed Denial of Secrets (DDOSecrets), contains 13,726 submissions to Heritage’s Presidential Administration Academy application form and includes multiple applicants who later took posts in the federal government.

What was leaked and how

In June 2025 DDOSecrets released a database of more than 13,000 Project 2025 application submissions. Project 2025 was a Heritage Foundation effort to assemble a pipeline of potential hires for a second Trump administration; the project’s leadership described the database as “akin to a conservative LinkedIn” and aimed to compile roughly 20,000 recruits. The Presidential Administration Academy’s open application process was widely publicized in conservative outlets during early 2024, and training videos from the academy surfaced publicly in August 2024.

What applicants were asked

The application asked respondents to classify their political beliefs via a dropdown menu, summarize their political philosophy, name primary intellectual influences, list books and public figures that shaped them, and state positions on policy proposals such as whether the United States should increase legal immigration.

Carl Schmitt and other authoritarian influences

Dozens of applicants listed Carl Schmitt — a German jurist whose legal work after 1933 aligned with National Socialist ideology — among their intellectual influences. Ville Suuronen, a research fellow at the University of Turku who has written about Schmitt, notes that Schmitt adapted his legal theory after joining the Nazi Party and used it to legitimize Nazi policies, including endorsement of the Night of the Long Knives and antisemitic legal initiatives.

Several applicants who named Schmitt later entered government roles. Examples in the leaked files include Paul Ingrassia, recently appointed deputy general counsel at the General Services Administration, who listed Schmitt’s Concept of the Political, Political Theology and Constitutional Theory among his influences. Olivia Ingrassia, who has worked at the Office of Management and Budget, also cited Schmitt.

Max Matheu, formerly a Heritage lawyer and now listed as an attorney adviser at the State Department, praised Schmitt’s friend/enemy distinction in his application and wrote about a shared cultural heritage as central to American politics. Critics contend language invoking “Heritage Americans” can carry exclusionary connotations.

Extremist rhetoric and conspiratorial themes

Some applications combined Schmittian ideas with explicitly racist or conspiratorial rhetoric. One applicant argued that the political struggle is a war in which enemies must be “ruthlessly” destroyed and invoked alarmist migration narratives that echo the Great Replacement conspiracy theory. Several applicants named Jared Taylor, the white‑nationalist founder of American Renaissance, as an influence; other entries praised fringe or far‑right figures such as Neema Parvini.

Admiration for authoritarian foreign leaders

Dozens of applicants expressed admiration for El Salvador’s president Nayib Bukele. That praise drew scrutiny after reports that hundreds deported to El Salvador were subsequently subjected to abuse in that country’s prison system. Applicants who cited Bukele described centralized executive authority and tough crime measures as models to emulate.

Secretive networks and nativist groups

At least seven applicants were identified as members of the Old Glory Club, a men‑only nativist network that researchers have described as secretive and extremism‑linked. These applicants often made little effort to obscure nativist or exclusionary views; one founding member explicitly defended a legal right to discriminate on the basis of association and criticized anti‑discrimination laws.

Responses, context and analysis

Heritage sources told the reporting team they could not pre‑screen applicants who used a public application link and therefore would not know applicants’ political views at the time of submission. A Heritage spokesperson declined to provide substantive comment. The State Department and other agencies were contacted for comment where applicants currently hold positions; one agency suggested submitting formal inquiries through official channels.

Hannah Gais, a senior analyst at the Southern Poverty Law Center, described the findings as unsurprising given Project 2025’s stated aims, noting that a “no enemies to the right” stance has encouraged some activists to embrace increasingly radical influences. Academics warn that Schmitt’s critique of liberalism — with its core friend/enemy distinction and acceptance of existential political conflict — has long fed anti‑democratic currents across a variety of right‑wing movements.

Methodology note

The dataset was released by DDOSecrets; the reporting team analyzed the files and contacted individuals named in the applications using the contact information provided and, where available, public professional addresses. The identity of the actor or actors who obtained and shared the files has not been disclosed.

Implications

The material highlights how openly expressing admiration for authoritarian or extremist thinkers can surface in public staffing pipelines and underscores the limits of open application channels for vetting sensitive government roles. Experts say the findings should prompt institutions and policymakers to consider how recruitment processes and ideological influences affect governance and public trust.