In what ways might the Pentagon’s pressure on Scouting America redefine civilian‑military boundary norms and affect nonprofit governance frameworks?
The Pentagon's recent ultimatum to Scouting America—culminating in a signed memorandum of understanding (MOU) that conditions continued military support on ideological and policy alignment—represents a significant development in how federal agencies interact with private civilian organizations. This intervention raises substantial questions about the traditional demarcation between military institutions and civil society, while simultaneously establishing potential precedents for how government partnerships can reshape nonprofit governance.
The Department of Defense maintains an extensive, century-old partnership with Scouting America that includes logistical support for the quadrennial National Jamboree, access to military bases for Scout troop meetings in the United States and abroad, medical and emergency services, and advanced enlisted rank for Eagle Scouts who join the militaryPentagon shifts toward maintaining ties to Scouting - WAMCwamc +1. This support is characterized as "in-kind" rather than direct funding, encompassing access to facilities, personnel deployment, and institutional benefits rather than cash grants@MiamiCapitalist @EricLDaugh The Department of Defense, under Secretary Hegseth, maintains a century-old partnership with Scouting America. It includes in-kind support like access to military bases/facilities/equipment, personnel for events (e.g., National Jamboree), and programs for kids of service members—plus merit badges tied to military service. Hegseth is conditioning that support on reverting to biological sex separations in intimate spaces and dropping DEI policies.x .
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth leveraged this relationship by threatening complete severance unless Scouting America implemented what Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell termed "common-sense, core value reforms"STATEMENT: From Day One at the War Department, we have made it very clear: No more DEI at DoW. Zero tolerance. As a result, over the past several months, the Department of War has been reviewing its relationship with Scouting America—formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America. A great organization, that has — in many ways — lost its way. On January 21st, 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14173: "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity," terminating radical DEl preferencing in federal contracting. All of our affiliations must meet this standard. But, for more than a decade now, Scouting America's leadership has made decisions that run counter to the values of this administration and this Department of War, including an embrace of DEl and other social justice, gender-fluid ideological stances. This is unacceptable. Our review of the DoW's financial assistance and partnership with Scouting America, including its quadrennial National Jamboree celebration, has been rigorous and ongoing. Scouting America remains far from perfect, but they have firmly committed to a return to core principles. Back to God and country—immediately! Scouting America and the Department of War are near a final agreement where we believe we can continue our partnership with Scouting America, as long as the organization rapidly implements the common-sense, core value reforms. They are on the clock, and we are watching. We have more to announce soon.x . The leaked draft memo obtained by NPR characterized Scouting America as having "attacked boy-friendly spaces" and abandoned "masculine virtues," criticizing the organization as "genderless" following its 2024 rebrand from the Boy Scouts of AmericaU.S. ready to cut support to Scouts, accusing them of attacking 'boy-friendly spaces'youtube +1.
The resulting MOU requires Scouting America to:
The traditional justification for military partnerships with civilian youth organizations has centered on mutual benefit: youth development aligned with values conducive to military service, and a reliable recruitment pipeline for the armed forcesUnderstanding the Impact of Department of Defense Youth Programs on Bridging the Civilian-Military Divide | RANDrand . The Pentagon's youth programs—including STARBASE, National Guard Youth ChalleNGe, and Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps—serve over half a million young people annually with a "shared commitment to providing service and positive outreach to communities" and helping "bridge the civilian-military divide"Understanding the Impact of Department of Defense Youth Programs on Bridging the Civilian-Military Divide | RANDrand .
Scouting America has historically served this recruitment function effectively. According to the organization, "Eagle Scouts are heavily represented in ROTC programs, service academies and military leadership tracks" with approximately one in five West Point cadets being Eagle ScoutsTransgender youths are targeted in Scouting America changes pushed by the Pentagonyahoo +1. The organization emphasized it is "one of the most reliable pipelines to the United States Armed Forces our country has ever known"Transgender youths are targeted in Scouting America changes pushed by the Pentagonyahoo .
The current intervention, however, extends beyond ensuring mutual alignment on professional values to mandating specific positions on contested social and ideological questions. As one commentator observed, "The Pentagon leveraging federal power to reshape a private youth organization's internal rules" regarding "tents and merit badges" represents "culture war governance" rather than "national security"🚨 Pete Hegseth is publicly taking credit for pressuring Scouting America to reverse its gender-identity policy and scrap DEI standards — while making Pentagon support “contingent” on compliance. The Department of Defense is now policing tents and merit badges. If you support the policy, fine. Debate it. But let’s be honest about what this is: The Pentagon leveraging federal power to reshape a private youth organization’s internal rules. That’s not national security. That’s culture war governance.x .
The MOU's establishment of a Pentagon-appointed liaison officer to a private civilian organization represents a particularly notable feature. This individual will maintain "regular communications" and "facilitat[e] coordination on matters that may be of mutual interest related to the MOU"Hegseth Says Scouting America Support to Continue Upon ...war . While government-nonprofit liaison arrangements exist in other contexts—such as sector liaisons for critical infrastructure protectionThe Department of Defense Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) Plan Version 1.0fas —embedding a military officer within a youth organization's governance structure to monitor ideological compliance appears unprecedented.
This arrangement invites comparison to concerns raised in civilian-military relations scholarship about maintaining clear boundaries between military operations and civilian institutions. The conventional model dictates that "military leaders provide military advice to the civilian authorities who control the armed forces, and that the military remains a nonpartisan institution"Civil-Military Relations: Repairing Fractured Ties : Democracy Journaldemocracyjournal . The Pentagon's intervention inverts this relationship by positioning military authorities as arbiters of a civilian organization's internal policies.
Guidelines developed through extensive negotiation between InterAction and the Department of Defense in 2005-2007 addressed civilian-military relations in humanitarian contexts. These guidelines emphasized that the U.S. armed forces "should not describe NGOs as 'force multipliers' or 'partners'" to ensure "the security risks faced by humanitarian organisations, and the civilian populations they seek to assist, are not exacerbated by the conflation of humanitarian action with the political objectives and activities of US military forces"Civil-military relations and the US armed forces | Humanitarian Practice Networkodihpn .
While Scouting America differs fundamentally from humanitarian NGOs, the underlying principle—that civilian organizations maintain independence from military political objectives—has informed the traditional understanding of civilian-military boundaries. The current MOU effectively positions Scouting America as an extension of Pentagon policy priorities, requiring alignment with specific executive orders and ideological positions as a condition of partnership.
Academic research on nonprofit governance has extensively documented how government funding affects organizational autonomy. Scholars have found that "government funding can affect the internal governance systems of nonprofit organizations" through multiple mechanisms: increasing board time devoted to compliance requirements, changing board composition to enhance compliance capacity, and creating tensions between management and boards over roles and responsibilities[PDF] The Effect of Government Funding on Nonprofit Administrative ...harvard .
The Pentagon-Scouting America situation exemplifies these dynamics in extreme form. Scouting America dissolved its DEI board committee, eliminated a mandatory merit badge, and adopted specific membership criteria at Pentagon direction Scouting America to alter policies including biological sex requirement to maintain military support, Hegseth says - CBS Newscbsnews +1. These changes extend far beyond typical compliance requirements associated with government partnerships.
Research indicates that "reliance on government funding decreases the likelihood of developing boards that are closely aligned with the mission and constituents of the organization"How Government Funding Compromises Nonprofit Independencephilanthropyroundtable . Nonprofits with closer financial ties to government "report reduced autonomy in strategic decision-making, such as defining missions, determining target groups, and setting procedural goals"How Government Funding Compromises Nonprofit Independencephilanthropyroundtable . The Scouting America case demonstrates these findings in acute form, with the organization altering fundamental aspects of its identity and programming under external pressure.
The MOU establishes a conditional partnership model with several distinctive features:
Six-Month Review Cycles: The Pentagon will "vigorously review" changes within six months and may "cease its support of Scouting America if it fails to comply"Pentagon says Scouting America will alter policies - AP Newsapnews . This creates ongoing accountability to external political authorities rather than organizational constituents or mission-based metrics.
Executive Order Compliance: The MOU requires "full adherence with the principles contained in Executive Order 14173"Hegseth Says Scouting America Support to Continue Upon ...war , tying organizational policy to presidential directives that may change with administrations.
Programmatic Content Control: Beyond administrative compliance, the Pentagon influenced specific program content by requiring elimination of a merit badge and introduction of a new Military Service merit badgeHegseth, DoD Reach Agreement with Scouting America on These 'Key Reforms' | Military.commilitary .
Value Statement Requirements: The MOU emphasizes return to "core principles" including "duty to God and country"STATEMENT: From Day One at the War Department, we have made it very clear: No more DEI at DoW. Zero tolerance. As a result, over the past several months, the Department of War has been reviewing its relationship with Scouting America—formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America. A great organization, that has — in many ways — lost its way. On January 21st, 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14173: "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity," terminating radical DEl preferencing in federal contracting. All of our affiliations must meet this standard. But, for more than a decade now, Scouting America's leadership has made decisions that run counter to the values of this administration and this Department of War, including an embrace of DEl and other social justice, gender-fluid ideological stances. This is unacceptable. Our review of the DoW's financial assistance and partnership with Scouting America, including its quadrennial National Jamboree celebration, has been rigorous and ongoing. Scouting America remains far from perfect, but they have firmly committed to a return to core principles. Back to God and country—immediately! Scouting America and the Department of War are near a final agreement where we believe we can continue our partnership with Scouting America, as long as the organization rapidly implements the common-sense, core value reforms. They are on the clock, and we are watching. We have more to announce soon.x , with Hegseth criticizing the organization for having "watered down" its "focus on God as the ruler of the universe" to include "openness to humanism and Earth-centered pagan religions" Scouting America to alter policies including biological sex requirement to maintain military support, Hegseth says - CBS Newscbsnews .
The case illustrates how external pressure can override traditional nonprofit board governance processes. Scouting America's CEO Roger Krone characterized the outcome as a "renewed, strengthened partnership" achieved through "several months" of "dialogue with Department leadership to align on how we could deepen our service to military families"Scouting America ends DEI efforts in deal with Pentagonusatoday . However, the organization's initial response to the leaked memo described itself as "surprised and disappointed," and Ranking Member Subramanyam's letter to Secretary Hegseth noted the proposal "has been met with significant concerns among military families, youth program advocates, and military officials"Ranking Member Subramanyam Demands Answers on Pentagon Plan Severing Ties with Scouting America | Representative Suhas Subramanyamhouse .
This sequence—public threat, organizational objection, ultimate capitulation—demonstrates the coercive potential of leverage over resources critical to organizational operations. The National Jamboree, held every four years, "draws as many as 20,000 youths and adult leaders to a remote site in West Virginia" and "requires extensive planning," with aid "first requested in late 2023"Pentagon shifts toward maintaining ties to Scouting - WAMCwamc . Pentagon withdrawal "would have major ramifications" as "the Scouts would have to scramble to replace medical care, transportation and other emergency services"Pentagon shifts toward maintaining ties to Scouting - WAMCwamc .
The unconstitutional conditions doctrine "prohibits the government from coercing people into giving up their constitutional rights" and "holds that government may not grant a benefit on the condition that the beneficiary surrender a constitutional right, even if the government may withhold that benefit altogether"Federal Funding Restrictions, Academic Research, and the ...georgetown .
In Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International (2013), the Supreme Court "struck down a requirement that nonprofits adopt a government-approved position opposing prostitution in order to receive global health funding," holding that "the government could not make program funds dependent on grant-seeking groups adopting particular political or moral beliefs"Harvard, like all Americans, can’t be punished by the government for speaking freely – and a federal court decision upholds decades of precedents saying sotheconversation .
The Pentagon-Scouting America arrangement arguably goes further than the prostitution-pledge requirement by conditioning support on organizational policy changes regarding membership criteria and programmatic content. However, the government's leverage here is primarily "in-kind" support rather than direct funding, and Scouting America remains "free to decline" the partnershipExpressive Discrimination: Universities' First Amendment Right to Affirmative Action — Part 3reason .
Legal scholars note that "while the government may generally place conditions on the use of benefits that it provides, it generally may not control the use of the recipient's other assets as a condition of providing the benefit"Expressive Discrimination: Universities' First Amendment Right to Affirmative Action — Part 3reason . The Pentagon's conditions extend to organizational-wide policies affecting all members and programs, not merely those directly supported by military resources.
In Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000), the Supreme Court held that "freedom of association included the right of a private organization to discriminate," striking down a New Jersey statute that would have required the Boy Scouts to accept gay scoutmasters because the organization "had the right to associate with whomever they chose"First Amendment Rights of Assembly, Petition and Association: Module 4 of 5youtube +1.
The current situation presents a different configuration: rather than the government compelling inclusion, the government is leveraging its partnership to encourage exclusion (of transgender members) and ideological conformity. The question becomes whether conditioning government benefits on exercising associational rights in a particular direction constitutes impermissible viewpoint discrimination or permissible resource allocation.
One congressional letter emphasized that Scouting America "is and has always been a nonpartisan organization" that has "worked with every U.S. presidential administration – Republican and Democrat"Ranking Member Subramanyam Demands Answers on Pentagon Plan Severing Ties with Scouting America | Representative Suhas Subramanyamhouse . The Pentagon's intervention effectively ends this nonpartisan posture by requiring alignment with specific executive orders and ideological positions associated with the current administration.
The MOU's requirement that Scouting America comply with Executive Order 14173—"Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity"—connects this case to a broader pattern of federal agency action against DEI initiatives. The order "prohibits private organizations from conducting any Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility employment programs for jobs created by federal contracts" and requires agencies to identify "up to nine potential civil compliance investigations of publicly traded corporations, large non-profit corporations or associations, foundations with assets of 500 million dollars or more"Executive Order 14173 - Wikipediawikipedia +1.
Federal contractors and grantees must now "affirmatively certify that [they do] not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws"Labor & Employment Advisory | The Impact of President Trump’s DEI Executive Orders on Private-Sector Employers | News & Insights | Alston & Birdalston . This certification carries potential False Claims Act liability, as "compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws is 'material to the government's payment decisions'"[PDF] 1 FAQs on Responding to Recent DEI Executive Orders July 21 ...publiccounsel .
The Scouting America case thus serves as an exemplar of how Executive Order 14173 is being applied beyond traditional federal contractors to organizations with in-kind government relationships. If upheld and replicated, this approach could extend ideological compliance requirements to numerous nonprofits that benefit from government partnerships without receiving direct funding.
The Department of Defense maintains extensive partnerships with civilian youth organizations. DoD sponsors "the largest employer-sponsored child care system in the United States" with "more than 26,000 employees" serving "infants through teenagers in more than 850 child development centers"Entry-Level Careers with Military Children and Youth at The Department of Defenseyoutube . DoD youth programs are "affiliate members with the Boys and Girls Clubs of America" and "collaborate with local 4-H youth development programs"Entry-Level Careers with Military Children and Youth at The Department of Defenseyoutube .
If the Scouting America model establishes precedent, other affiliated organizations may face similar pressure to align policies with administration priorities. The MOU's six-month review cycle and conditional support framework could become a template for Pentagon relationships with civilian partners.
The case arrives at a moment of heightened concern about nonprofit independence. Research indicates that "government funding is frequently accompanied by stringent evaluative and regulatory provisions" including "requirements for financial management, adherence to accounting standards, meeting minimum quality benchmarks, alignment with core program goals, and compliance with national policy priorities"How Government Funding Compromises Nonprofit Independencephilanthropyroundtable .
The Pentagon-Scouting America intervention extends such requirements into territory traditionally considered internal to organizational governance: membership criteria, badge content, and ideological positioning. One analyst characterized the situation as demonstrating that "The Department of Defense is now policing tents and merit badges"🚨 Pete Hegseth is publicly taking credit for pressuring Scouting America to reverse its gender-identity policy and scrap DEI standards — while making Pentagon support “contingent” on compliance. The Department of Defense is now policing tents and merit badges. If you support the policy, fine. Debate it. But let’s be honest about what this is: The Pentagon leveraging federal power to reshape a private youth organization’s internal rules. That’s not national security. That’s culture war governance.x .
The January 2025 federal funding freeze and subsequent executive actions targeting nonprofits have already prompted over 1,000 charities to rewrite their mission statements to remove DEI language from IRS filingsAfter Trump ordered his administration to root out “illegal” diversity, equity & inclusion, opening the door to investigations and funding cuts for offenders, 1,000+ charities rewrote their mission statements in forms they filed this year with IRS. https://t.co/e7Wgiqcga9x . The Scouting America case suggests that organizations with government partnerships—even those not involving direct funding—may face pressure to make similar adjustments.
Ironically, severing or conditioning the Scouting partnership could undermine the military's recruitment interests. The Heritage Foundation has identified a "current crisis in military recruiting" as "a direct threat to U.S. national security," noting that "most of the factors inhibiting recruitment lie outside the military's control"It’s Time for a National Security Strategy for Military Recruiting | The Heritage Foundationheritage . Military families "rely heavily on Scout units on bases for stability during frequent relocations," and "loss of base access for Scouting troops could cut off youth development programs for these families"Ranking Member Subramanyam Demands Answers on Pentagon Plan Severing Ties with Scouting America | Representative Suhas Subramanyamhouse .
The conditional partnership model introduces political volatility into what had been a stable, mutually beneficial relationship. Future administrations with different priorities could impose different conditions, potentially creating a cycle of policy reversals that undermines the long-term value of the partnership for both parties.
Despite the significant policy changes, Scouting America's official response emphasized continuity and framed the outcome as preserving core organizational elements. The organization "maintained its new name as 'Scouting America' and preserved our service to the more than 200,000 girls who participate in our programs"Transgender youths are targeted in Scouting America changes pushed by the Pentagonyahoo +1.
The organization characterized the agreement as resulting from "several months" of "dialogue" to "deepen our service to military families, while making programmatic updates to comply with Executive Order 14173"Scouting America issued the following statement today ... - Facebookfacebook . This framing positions the organization as having negotiated rather than capitulated, though the substantive policy changes closely track Pentagon demands.
The organization noted it "held firm on the core commitments that define us," specifically the retention of girls in programsScouting America issued the following statement today ... - Facebookfacebook . However, Secretary Hegseth concluded his announcement by stating, "Ideally, I believe the Boy Scouts should go back to being the Boy Scouts as originally founded, a group that develops boys into men. Maybe someday"Pentagon says Scouting America will alter policies - AP Newsapnews —suggesting the current agreement may represent an interim step rather than final resolution from the Pentagon's perspective.
The Pentagon's intervention in Scouting America's governance represents a significant case study in the potential for government partnerships to reshape private organizational policies beyond traditional compliance requirements. The arrangement establishes mechanisms—including a Pentagon-appointed liaison, six-month review cycles, and ideological alignment conditions—that could serve as templates for future government-nonprofit relationships.
Whether this development represents an aberration or a harbinger depends substantially on legal and political developments. The unconstitutional conditions doctrine provides potential grounds for challenge, though the in-kind nature of Pentagon support and Scouting America's apparent voluntary acquiescence complicate such arguments. The involvement of Executive Order 14173 connects this case to broader efforts to extend federal anti-DEI policies into the private sector.
For nonprofit governance more broadly, the case illustrates the vulnerability of organizations dependent on government partnerships to ideological pressure, even when that dependence involves in-kind support rather than direct funding. The traditional expectation that nonprofits maintain board-level autonomy over mission, membership, and programming faces challenge when government partners leverage critical operational support to demand policy alignment.
The civilian-military boundary question ultimately concerns the appropriate scope of military influence over civilian institutions. While the Pentagon has legitimate interests in youth development programs that support recruitment and military family welfare, the extension of those interests to mandate specific ideological positions—regarding religion, gender identity, and diversity initiatives—represents a qualitative expansion of military influence into traditionally civilian domains.