Breakfast turned political in Michigan this week when the all-natural, vegan-friendly restaurant chain, Anna's House, got online backlash for its extensive monetary contributions to President Donald Trump's reelection campaign.

The high-end breakfast restaurant chain opened in west Michigan in 2003, but it has since expanded and built locations all over the state, including two in metro Detroit.

But it came under fire on Wednesday when Grand Rapids resident Doug Chu took to Facebook and published a screenshot, detailing the donations made by Anna's House to Trump's reelection campaign.

The screenshot, taken from the FEC website, stated that an entity under the name of Anna's House Corporate LLC donated $5,600 directly to the campaign, and another $15,000 indirectly through a PAC under the name of "Trump Victory."

In his Facebook post, Chu said: "anna's house is cancelled."

Related: Julián Castro defends his twin brother, U.S. Rep. Joaquin Castro, after publishing of Trump donor list

"I don't personally have a problem with an individual using their own name making a donation to a political entity," he said. "If you donate in the name of your business then you imply that the mission and purpose and values of your business are aligned in support of the political entity that you are donating money to."

He said he just wants people to be more aware of where their money goes, but personally doesn't agree with what Anna's House is doing with their money.

Many other users agreed with Chu's sentiment, commenting on the post and expressing their disapproval of the restaurant's decision to donate to Trump. But the restaurant's owner, Josh Beckett, stood by his decision.

"I am proud to live in a country where we are free to have different opinions and to support a candidate of our choice," he said in a statement to the Free Press. "Embracing (our) differences and respecting each other despite them is what makes our country great."

Richard Hall, professor at the University of Michigan's Ford School of Public Policy, believes both parties are within their rights.

Beckett made contributions to Trump's reelection campaign under Anna's House Corporate LLC, and according to Hall and the FEC, using the LLC legally allowed him to exercise his free speech and give directly to a candidate.

Chu and any other Anna's House patron is similarly exercising their right to free speech when they decide to boycott or express views against the restaurant online.

But Hall thinks the Anna's House case is an isolated example of a larger problem involving free speech and campaign finance laws.

He believes political corruption and free speech are at odds when talking about the disclosure of campaign donations.

Public donations might deter some from expressing political support through monetary contributions, but undisclosed donations might fuel corruption in the political sphere.

"One of the reasons the court has worried about this is that if you disclose donors, then those donors can be intimidated into not donating, which is basically what (Beckett's) concern is," Hall said.

It's a concern that is also being debated in the national political arena.

Presidential candidate Julian Castro defended his brother, U.S. Rep Joaquin Castro, after he publicized a list on Twitter that exposed the donors in his constituency who made maximum donations to President Trump's reelection campaign.