As grief swept through Washington D.C. over the fatal shooting of two young diplomats, Alex Soros — billionaire heir and newly prominent political donor — found himself at the center of a growing firestorm.
What began as a public expression of sympathy quickly spiraled into accusations, outrage, and political finger-pointing.
The victims, Yaron Lischinsky, an Israeli national, and Sarah Milgrim, an American, were reportedly on the verge of getting engaged.
Their lives were cut short outside the Capital Jewish Museum on Wednesday night.
Police say the shooter, 31-year-old Elias Rodriguez, shouted “Free, free Palestine” after being taken into custody.
Alex Soros Responds — And Faces Backlash
The next day, Soros took to social media to condemn the attack in strong terms, calling it “evil in its most basic form” and a “brutal antisemitic act.”
But instead of rallying support, his post triggered a wave of criticism — much of it accusing him of hypocrisy.
Social media erupted with angry replies. One user wrote, “Alex Soros unclear how funding rabid Jew-hating organizations and individuals could lead to the killing of Jews.”
Others were even more blunt, suggesting that his foundation’s financial support of pro-Palestinian and left-leaning causes helped create the conditions for this tragedy.
Questions Over His Foundation’s Ties
Soros has taken over leadership of the Open Society Foundations (OSF) from his father, George Soros, one of the most controversial figures in global philanthropy and politics.
Conservative voices, especially from Fox News, have long claimed OSF funds groups that oppose the state of Israel.
Israel’s diaspora affairs minister, Amichai Chikli, once said that Alex was “a replica of his father,” implying continued hostility toward Zionism.
Similarly, Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, criticized the elder Soros for financially backing organizations that support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.
A Complicated Legacy and A Spotlight He Didn’t Choose
Alex has referred to himself jokingly as his father’s “loyal parasite,” revealing just how closely he’s been groomed for this role.
But not everyone was convinced he was up for the job.
According to insiders quoted in New York Magazine, many believed another sibling, Jonathan, should have taken over.
One source even compared Alex to Roman Roy from Succession — a character infamous for being immature and out of his depth.
Political Ambitions in a New Trump Era
Now that Donald Trump is back in the White House, Alex Soros is doubling down on his political mission: using his inherited fortune to blunt the former president’s influence.
His current strategy? Pump millions into the 2026 midterms in hopes of flipping Congress blue.
This isn’t new territory for the Soros family. Conservatives, including Trump himself, have frequently used George Soros as a symbol of liberal elitism.
Trump once ranted on Truth Social about Soros funding Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg — just days before Trump was indicted in the hush money case involving Stormy Daniels.
Despite being convicted on all counts, Trump’s reelection shielded him from facing any consequences.
A List of Democratic Favorites — But No Clear Party Leader
When asked who he sees as the future of the Democratic Party, Alex listed a handful of rising stars: Josh Shapiro, AOC, Raphael Warnock, Gretchen Whitmer, Tim Walz, Chris Murphy, and Brian Schatz.
But notably, he didn’t name a clear standard-bearer.
With the party’s direction still uncertain, he seems more focused on funding than leading.
Shifting Priorities at the Open Society Foundations
Under Alex’s leadership, OSF has undergone a massive transformation.
The organization has been downsizing since 2017, cutting staff from around 1,700 to just 500.
It has also scaled back programs in areas like public health, education, journalism, and scholarships.
Now, the foundation seems to be turning more directly toward political activism.
While it continues to offer grants, its new orientation suggests a stronger focus on shaping elections and policy — a move many critics view as openly partisan.