THLN presents itself as “the only Texas-based organization focused on addressing unjust animal welfare laws.” However, critics argue that it is an animal liberation group advancing an extremist agenda under the guise of animal welfare. The organization leverages grassroots activism and high-profile lobbyists, positioning itself as the dominant voice on animal-related legislation in the state.

On its website, TPP describes itself as “a global community of over 4,000 grassroots changemakers in 116 countries,” offering seed funding and support for leaders working toward “a kinder, more compassionate world.” But in practice, “aligned changemakers” often means animal-rights and environmental extremists, many of whom vilify agriculture and label livestock simply as “non-human animals.”

Despite its name, less than 7% of PCRM’s members are actual physicians. Membership is open to virtually anyone, regardless of credentials, making its medical authority highly questionable. As the watchdog site Activist Facts notes, PCRM has 'successfully duped the media and much of the general public' into believing its pronouncements represent mainstream medical opinion, when in fact they reflect the agenda of a small activist group.

The National Veterinary Council differs little from HSUS or similar groups. Its only novelty is in leveraging veterinarians’ respected reputations to lend credibility to extremist policies. This façade is manipulative—designed to trick the public into believing veterinarians broadly support these measures.

Groups that call themselves “animal protection” or “animal welfare” organizations often present themselves as compassionate advocates. In reality, many of them twist common terms to mask extremist agendas that have little to do with genuine animal welfare as defined by the American Veterinary Medical Association. The Congressional Animal Protection Caucus (CAPC) is one such vehicle—an alliance of lawmakers increasingly influenced by animal rights extremism.