In a major court ruling in Virginia on Tuesday, a Richmond judge ordered that a pro-Palestinian group with alleged ties to Hamas must turn over closely guarded financial documents requested by the state attorney general as part of an investigation into its funding sources, according to a statement released by his office.

The highly anticipated decision represents a significant setback for American Muslims for Palestine, a Virginia-based nonprofit organization that could now be compelled to turn over sensitive financial records, including donor information it has long successfully shielded from public view.

Jason Miyares, the Republican attorney general, had for months been seeking to compel AMP to hand over its records after his office launched its investigation shortly after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

Miyares said in a statement announcing the probe last October that his office was investigating the group, which has drawn increased scrutiny in the wake of the attacks, “for fundraising without proper registration and for potentially violating Virginia’s charitable solicitation laws, including benefitting or providing support to terrorist organizations.”

The attorney general had issued a civil investigative demand seeking documents, which lawyers for AMP had challenged in a petition. Following a long delay, Miyares’ office said a judge had on Tuesday ordered AMP to “produce records” requested by the demand and had “denied” the group’s petition to narrow the focus of the probe.

In a brief statement to Jewish Insider, Miyares said he was “pleased with the court’s decision,” which marks the first meaningful development in one of several cases that are part of a multipronged legal effort to pry secretive donor information from the group.

His office did not share further comment, citing the ongoing investigation.

Despite claiming victory, Christina Jump, an attorney for AMP who attended the hearing in Richmond, countered in an email to JI that the “court did not make a specific ruling regarding any documents nor about the constitutional protections we assert,” claiming donor information is “protected by the First Amendment.”

Jump, who is representing AMP in civil lawsuits also targeting the nonprofit, said the judge “held that the attorney general’s office had a right to ask about past noncompliance and to seek compliance” with Virginia state law. The court “did not explain any further and there is no order yet,” she said, “so we will discuss with the attorney general’s office’s attorneys what they seek.”

While she said that AMP would “probably” be able to retroactively correct what the attorney general’s office cited in the demand as its failure to produce required paperwork going back several years, Jump still pledged to challenge the request for “all donor information and transactions,” arguing that such documents exceed the scope of the investigation.

“If the attorney general’s office is less interested in compliance with the Virginia statute and not satisfied with retroactive filings, and still wants a fishing expedition that violates federally protected rights not addressed by the Court today, then we aren’t done with legal proceedings yet,” Jump told JI. 

A person familiar with the court hearing confirmed to JI on Tuesday that the judge presiding over the case had denied AMP’s petition to challenge the civil investigative demand for additional records, noting the attorney general had acted “reasonably” and in “good faith.”

The judge ruled that AMP’s acknowledgement in its petition that it had failed to file required paperwork had justified the order, while also indicating that the attorney general’s interest in ensuring donor funds have not been misused had justified the request for documents, according to the person familiar with the case.

The chief deputy attorney general who was present at the hearing suggested that he would request an order, which will be legally binding once approved by a judge, that AMP reply to its demand within 21 days, the person said. 

While Jump indicated that AMP could appeal the ruling, she said she would wait to see “proposed language” from the attorney general’s office on a written order before making her decision, noting that the judge had “instructed the parties to confer.”

Founded in 2006, AMP describes itself as “a grassroots organization dedicated to advancing the movement for justice in Palestine by educating the American public about Palestine and its rich cultural, historical and religious heritage and through grassroots mobilization and advocacy.”

But the group has drawn mounting legal scrutiny in recent months over its ties to anti-Israel protests on college campuses around the country as well as its financial support for National Students for Justice in Palestine, which has voiced pro-Hamas rhetoric. 

In addition, some leading officials at AMP were also once affiliated with a now-defunct advocacy group, the Islamic Association for Palestine, found liable in a separate lawsuit for aiding Hamas. AMP insists it has never supported terrorism and that it does not send money overseas. 

The attorney general’s investigation is among several high-profile legal efforts targeting AMP, including a civil lawsuit recently filed in Virginia that accuses the group of providing material support for Hamas.

The nonprofit is also the subject of an ongoing civil lawsuit in Chicago, which Miyares’ office has cited in court filings, alleging that AMP is an “alter ego” of such groups as IAP and seeking to collect a $156 million judgment that has never been paid to the family of David Boim, an American killed by Hamas in a 1996 terrorist attack at a West Bank bus stop.

The judge’s decision on Tuesday also comes in addition to letters from Congress seeking records from AMP, noted Jonathan Schanzer, the senior vice president for research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and an expert on terror financing. “The scrutiny into AMP continues to grow,” he said in an interview with JI.

“There is intense interest in learning whether there are foreign funds,” Schanzer added. “At some point, one gets the sense that AMP will have to begin to comply with these requests. It does seem like a question of when.”