{"schema_version":1,"citation_url":"https://567politics.com/news/oklahoma-inola-smelter-kushner-discovery-ownership-trump-november-2026","title":"Oklahoma AG seeks Kushner-related records in fight over Trump-backed aluminum smelter","description":"The state wants ownership and funding records, while developers defend the project and Kushner denies the allegations behind the request.","author":"567politics News Desk","publisher":"567politics","date_published":"2026-11-13T14:45:44.656758Z","date_modified":"2026-11-13T14:45:44.656758Z","body_markdown":"Oklahoma’s attorney general has asked a judge to let him obtain records showing whether Jared Kushner or affiliated businesses have any financial interest in the proposed Inola aluminum smelter or its Emirati backers. The **November 9 filing is a request to investigate that question, not evidence that Kushner owns a stake**. The project’s developers reject the attorney general’s assertions, and Kushner has denied the separate allegations that prompted the expanded request. [Original court filing, pages 1–5](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf); [developer’s response reported by KTUL](https://ktul.com/news/local/oklahoma-ag-seeks-court-ordered-discovery-on-inola-smelters-owners-funding-and-ties-11-09-2026); [Kushner’s published denial](https://jaredkushner.com/posts/response-to-matthew-coles-book/).\n\nThe request puts a specific transparency question inside a larger fight over the Trump administration’s industrial policy. The government has backed the smelter in court and created tariff incentives that its sponsors expect to use. But public support, a foreign-government investor and a presidential family relationship do not establish a corrupt exchange. The records sought could help test that claim—or show that the suspected connection does not exist.\n\nThis report examines the filing and the companies’ disclosures, checked November 13. It adds a distinct state-court inquiry to [567politics’ record of documented Kushner controversies](/news/jared-kushner-controversies-a-record-november-2026). We have not obtained a later ruling on this discovery request or sworn answers establishing a Kushner interest.\n\n## The state seeks records, including an admission that no Kushner interest exists\n\n[Attorney General Gentner Drummond](/politicians/gentner-drummond) filed the supplement in Rogers County District Court, case **CV-2026-108**. The defendants named on its cover are Century Aluminum Company and Aluminum Oklahoma, LLC, doing business as Oklahoma Primary Aluminum, LLC. Kushner is not named as a defendant in this filing. [Court filing, page 1](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf).\n\nThe state wants permission to gather evidence before the companies file an answer. Its revised questions reach communications, meetings and agreements involving a defined “Kushner Entity,” the smelter, U.S.–UAE cooperation, aluminum tariffs and government assistance. They also ask whether such an entity has held, could acquire or could receive a financial benefit from a relevant ownership interest. These are proposed questions to the companies, not answers supplied by them. [Proposed Century interrogatories 27–29, PDF page 27](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf).\n\n| Proposed record | What the state wants to test | What is not yet established |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Ownership and benefit records | Any direct or indirect Kushner interest | That such an interest exists |\n| Communications and agreements | Any role in the project or policy discussions | A request for political help |\n| Funding-source records | Where the Emirati capital originates | A payment to a public official |\n| Admissions denying a connection | Whether the issue can be narrowed | A sworn company response |\n\nSource: [November 9 supplement, pages 3–4, and proposed discovery](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf). The table describes requests; it does not imply that responsive records exist.\n\nOne provision deserves particular attention. The state asks permission to serve requests that the companies **admit no Kushner entity holds an ownership or control interest** in EGA, the venture or the smelter. It also seeks an admission that no relevant representative communicated with a Kushner entity about the smelter. That language leaves room for evidence disproving the suspected connection. [Supplement, page 4](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf).\n\nDrummond argues that ownership is relevant because public funds are involved and corporate decisions could favor completing the plant over protecting the community. His filing acknowledges that the defendants called that concern speculative. It says they oppose discovery before a ruling on their dismissal motion. Those descriptions come from the state’s account of the dispute; they are not the judge’s conclusions. [Supplement, pages 3–4](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf).\n\nThe requested response clock also remains a proposal. The state asks for answers within 30 days after service or the court’s order, whichever is later. It would be inaccurate to count 30 days from November 9 and announce that the companies have a fixed deadline. [Supplement, pages 4–5](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf).\n\n## The disclosed venture has two sponsors; public assistance is not a Kushner payment\n\nCentury’s latest quarterly filing describes a planned **60% EGA and 40% Century** ownership split under their joint development agreement. It projects annual output of 750,000 metric tons. The company says construction depends on engineering, a competitive long-term electricity agreement and a definitive joint-venture agreement. These are disclosed plans and conditions, not proof that the plant is operating. [Century’s September 30 Form 10-Q, “New Smelter Project”](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/949157/000162828026071033/cenx-20260930.htm).\n\n```chart\ntype: bar\ntitle: The disclosed venture plan gives EGA a 60% majority\nstacked: yes\nsource: [Century’s September 30, 2026 quarterly filing](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/949157/000162828026071033/cenx-20260930.htm)\nsuffix: %\nnote: Proposed ownership under the joint development agreement; a definitive joint venture agreement remains a condition. No Kushner interest is established.\n---\nProject | EGA | Century\nInola smelter | 60 | 40\n```\n\nEGA is backed by Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala Investment Company and the Investment Corporation of Dubai, as described in the state’s filing. Those are Emirati institutions. They should not be conflated with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, an Israeli entity or a U.S. political committee. [Supplement, page 2](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf).\n\n| Public support described | Amount or mechanism | Important limit |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| DOE cooperative agreement | Up to $500 million | Award ceiling, not verified cash paid |\n| Oklahoma incentives | About $255 million | State describes performance-based rebates |\n| Federal onshoring program | Half the applicable Section 232 duty on approved volumes | Requires an approved plan and compliance |\n\nSources: [Century’s DOE disclosure](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/949157/000162828026071033/cenx-20260930.htm), [Oklahoma’s November 9 announcement](https://oklahoma.gov/oag/news/newsroom/2026/november/drummond-seeks-ownership-disclosures-from-companies-behind-inola-smelter.html) and [July 20 presidential proclamation](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/07/further-strengthening-actions-taken-to-adjust-imports-of-aluminum-into-the-united-states/). These measures are different kinds of support and should not be added into a claim about money received by Kushner.\n\nThe award’s date changes the political timeline. Century reports signing its DOE cooperative agreement on **January 10, 2025**, before Trump’s second inauguration. Calling the full award a new Trump grant would erase that origin. The later administration’s support is separately documented by its tariff proclamation and Justice Department action. [Century’s Form 10-Q, “U.S. Department of Energy Award”](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/949157/000162828026071033/cenx-20260930.htm).\n\nOn July 20, 2026, [President Donald Trump](/politicians/donald-trump) authorized an onshoring program offering reduced duties on qualifying imports tied to new domestic capacity. Commerce must approve plans, monitor commitments and may rescind benefits for noncompliance. The proclamation creates a potential financial incentive. It does not name Kushner as a recipient or establish that he helped secure the program. [Proclamation](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/07/further-strengthening-actions-taken-to-adjust-imports-of-aluminum-into-the-united-states/).\n\nThe key money trail is therefore public assistance and proposed corporate ownership. It is not an FEC campaign-receipt total. Our [Kushner foreign-money ledger](/news/kushner-family-foreign-government-money-since-2010-documented-alleged-transfers) explains the wider need to distinguish investments, fees and other transactions. A connection shown in one deal cannot simply be assigned to another.\n\n## The administration and developers offer a national-security case\n\nThe Justice Department publicly supported the project in August. It argued that domestic primary aluminum is important for defense manufacturing and that the lawsuit was premature before environmental permit review. This is a substantive competing explanation for federal support: officials may favor the project because they believe it improves supply security. That rationale can be assessed without assuming a private financial motive. [DOJ’s August 28 statement](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-files-statement-interest-support-primary-aluminum-smelter-project-inola).\n\nDOJ said it asked the federal court to dismiss the suit. Oklahoma later announced that the case was returned to state court on September 3. A change of court does not decide whether the plant is safe or whether anyone has an improper interest. [State’s remand announcement](https://oklahoma.gov/oag/news/newsroom/2026/september/drummond-lauds-courts-decision-to-return-inola-smelter-case-to-state-court.html).\n\nThe developers’ January announcement projected 1,000 permanent jobs and 4,000 construction jobs, and said the partnership would combine EGA’s technology with Century’s U.S. experience. Those are the sponsors’ forecasts, not observed employment. Their promise of local benefits helps explain support for the project while leaving questions about environmental costs and financial interests open. [Joint company announcement](https://investors.centuryaluminum.com/news-events/press-releases/press-release-details/2026/Century-Aluminum-Joins-EGA-Project-to-Build-First-U-S--Smelter-in-Almost-50-Years/default.aspx).\n\nResponding to the November request, Oklahoma Primary Aluminum told KTUL it disagrees with the attorney general and will respond in the proper forum. It described an Oklahoma facility employing Americans, serving U.S. manufacturers and operating under federal and state law. It also pledged transparency. That is a published defense of the project; it is not the detailed ownership and funding response Drummond seeks. [Company statement carried by KTUL](https://ktul.com/news/local/oklahoma-ag-seeks-court-ordered-discovery-on-inola-smelters-owners-funding-and-ties-11-09-2026).\n\nAffected tribal governments raise a separate concern. Cherokee Nation’s published resolution text calls for meaningful consultation and technical information about risks to shared air, water and natural resources. It recognizes Muscogee Nation’s jurisdiction over the site. The registry displayed committee status when reviewed, so this article uses the text for its stated argument rather than treating that page as proof of final enactment. [Tribal legislative record](https://cherokee.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?FullText=1&GUID=E53FD577-6CC9-4A04-BEA1-96B238182D41&ID=8212796&Options=&Search=).\n\nEGA’s November 12 update says feasibility work and power and financing discussions continue. It also acknowledges Inola’s moratorium through April 7, 2027. The update is a company release republished by Zawya, not independent confirmation of every milestone. [EGA’s update](https://www.zawya.com/en/press-release/ega-lifts-margin-to-30-per-cent-despite-disruption-with-al-taweelah-restoration-on-track-and-global-growth-gathering-pace-2246229).\n\n```diagram\ntype: timeline\ntitle: The grant predates Trump’s second term; his administration later backed the project\nsource: [Century quarterly filing](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/949157/000162828026071033/cenx-20260930.htm), [company announcement](https://investors.centuryaluminum.com/news-events/press-releases/press-release-details/2026/Century-Aluminum-Joins-EGA-Project-to-Build-First-U-S--Smelter-in-Almost-50-Years/default.aspx), [Trump proclamation](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/07/further-strengthening-actions-taken-to-adjust-imports-of-aluminum-into-the-united-states/), [DOJ statement](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-files-statement-interest-support-primary-aluminum-smelter-project-inola), [state court filing](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf)\n---\n2025-01-10: Century reports signing DOE agreement for up to $500 million\n2026-01-26: EGA and Century announce 60–40 development arrangement\n2026-07-20: Trump authorizes aluminum onshoring tariff incentives\n2026-08-28: DOJ announces support for the smelter in court\n2026-11-09: Drummond seeks expanded Kushner-related discovery\n```\n\n## The disputed book claims remain disputed\n\nThe state expanded its request after Matthew Cole’s book excerpt alleged secret foreign-funded accounts benefiting Kushner during Trump’s first term. The supplement itself calls these allegations rather than findings. This review has not authenticated the alleged accounts, transfers or underlying intelligence. Their appearance in a court filing establishes that the state cited them, not that they occurred. [Supplement, page 2](https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/news-documents/2026/november/doc05285420261109112015.pdf); [original Vanity Fair excerpt](https://www.vanityfair.com/story/jared-kushner-hacked-phone-secret-negotiations).\n\nKushner’s counsel, Alejandro Brito, denied knowledge of or involvement with the alleged government-linked accounts. His point-by-point response, published on Kushner’s website October 22, says the supposed arrangements did not exist and rejects claims of private deals outside authorized U.S. policy. The denial predates the November smelter filing and should not be presented as a specific response to its questions. [Published counsel’s letter](https://jaredkushner.com/posts/response-to-matthew-coles-book/).\n\nIndependent coverage has also examined the dispute over the excerpt’s evidence. Status reported legal objections and unresolved questions about verification. Public Radio Tulsa and KTUL separately reported the state’s discovery effort; their reports do not supply independent bank records proving the underlying claims. [Status](https://www.status.news/p/jared-kushner-vanity-fair-book-matthew-cole); [Public Radio Tulsa](https://www.publicradiotulsa.org/local-regional/2026-11-10/state-attorney-general-gentner-drummond-seeks-ownership-disclosures-from-inola-smelter-companies).\n\nA proven project interest, if one emerged, would still require further work. An investigator would need to trace its value, timing and terms, identify any official act and examine the decision-maker’s role. A commercial interest alone would not prove a policy bargain. Conversely, a complete ownership record showing no Kushner interest would materially narrow this part of the inquiry.\n\n**Reporting limits:** We inspected the filed motion and relevant proposed questions visually. The state docket was not accessible through the research tool, and we did not obtain a later discovery order or company answers. We found no verified Jared Kushner funding profile; Trump and Drummond had no verified automated FEC snapshots. No campaign-donation amount is asserted here. Government-award records were not reconciled to Treasury outlays, so the reported ceiling is not treated as cash spent. No outreach was undertaken; responses are from published statements.\n\nThe records that would advance this story are the discovery ruling, any sworn answers, the venture’s ownership schedules and funding documents. Until those are available, the supported finding is a formal request for evidence about a possible connection—not an established Kushner stake.\n\n*Photo credit: Matty Stern / U.S. Embassy Jerusalem, [CC BY 2.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/), via [Wikimedia Commons](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dedication_ceremony_of_the_Embassy_of_the_United_States_in_Jerusalem_3121_(41251573125).jpg). Cropped for publication; archival photograph from May 14, 2018.*\n\n*This article was researched and written with AI assistance. No human editorial review is claimed.*","link_base":"https://567politics.com/news/oklahoma-inola-smelter-kushner-discovery-ownership-trump-november-2026","citation_guidance":"Cite citation_url. Preserve source links, dates and qualifications. date_modified is an edit date, not proof that every claim was rechecked. Third-party images and quoted material retain their own rights."}