Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Calista241

(5,586 posts)
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 11:09 AM Jul 2021

Supreme Court strikes down disclosure rules for political donors

Source: Axios

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a California law that required nonprofits to hand over a list of their biggest donors.

Why it matters: Some campaign-finance advocates have feared the court will begin chipping away at disclosure rules more broadly, making it harder and harder to figure out who’s funding major political causes.

The big picture: In a 6-3 ruling authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court said California had subjected donors to the threat of public harassment and intimidation, undermining their First Amendment right to free association.

Background: California requires nonprofit organizations to give the state a list of their biggest donors each year. The state is supposed to keep that information private, but it has routinely failed to do so. Donors’ names and addresses have often become easily available to the public, according to briefs in the case.

A pair of conservative nonprofits — including Americans for Prosperity, an arm of the Koch brothers’ political empire — sued California. Its pattern of making donor information public put individual donors in physical danger, they argued, especially in this toxic political climate.

Read more: https://www.axios.com/supreme-court-political-donors-california-709684f8-7374-449d-a02d-275f3f150339.html

27 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court strikes down disclosure rules for political donors (Original Post) Calista241 Jul 2021 OP
It should be that these so called "Donors" should face the truth of their convictions. Dustlawyer Jul 2021 #1
The ACLU and the NAACP took the side of the conservative organizations in this case. n/t Calista241 Jul 2021 #2
WTF? lagomorph777 Jul 2021 #7
If California was able to keep the information private, then jimfields33 Jul 2021 #8
NAACP backed a similar decision back in the 60s rurallib Jul 2021 #9
Roberts is doing what he was put there to do. FoxNewsSucks Jul 2021 #3
Who in the f**k needs transparency (sarcasm)!!!!!! JohnSJ Jul 2021 #4
If a citizen stands in the public square and voices his/her opinion, they stand exposed to all. Midnight Writer Jul 2021 #5
I'm all for free speech Mz Pip Jul 2021 #6
I agree. aocommunalpunch Jul 2021 #13
Appears the Koch brother's money even reaches into the SCOTUS. KS Toronado Jul 2021 #10
How do you think Roberts got the job in the first place? Ford_Prefect Jul 2021 #14
Doesn't surprise me one bit, probably did so with every Supreme Court nominee. KS Toronado Jul 2021 #18
Three who assisted Bush xxqqqzme Jul 2021 #20
The fact that these donors feel themselves "in danger" if Deminpenn Jul 2021 #11
I donate to Planned Parenthood. Expose my name and address, ... JustABozoOnThisBus Jul 2021 #21
Jmho, but most of these organizations are in the dark money Deminpenn Jul 2021 #24
I agree with Ari Berman LetMyPeopleVote Jul 2021 #12
Actually it would be 6-3, because Kennedy's seat was likely sold Polybius Jul 2021 #25
I suspect that Kennedy would remain on the bench LetMyPeopleVote Jul 2021 #27
Democracy is being slid out from under us in broad daylight. hadEnuf Jul 2021 #15
How is it free speech edhopper Jul 2021 #16
Another Anti-Transparency Ruling Handed Down DallasNE Jul 2021 #17
They're on a nazi roll today. orangecrush Jul 2021 #19
Free speech (if you're filthy rich)! Nt BootinUp Jul 2021 #22
The conservative activists on the court have been chipping away at our democracy for decades dlk Jul 2021 #23
Under this decision drug cartels from abroad dsc Jul 2021 #26

Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
1. It should be that these so called "Donors" should face the truth of their convictions.
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 11:13 AM
Jul 2021

They are donating for business and/or political reasons and should not be allowed to do it in the dark!

jimfields33

(15,787 posts)
8. If California was able to keep the information private, then
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 11:43 AM
Jul 2021

I’d agree. But the publish all kinds of information which was not allowed.

rurallib

(62,411 posts)
9. NAACP backed a similar decision back in the 60s
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 12:12 PM
Jul 2021

when being outed as a donor to the NAACP could be fatal

FoxNewsSucks

(10,429 posts)
3. Roberts is doing what he was put there to do.
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 11:16 AM
Jul 2021

Protect billionaires, corporations, and their ability to buy politicians.

Today's decisions will make it nearly impossible for Democrats to win control in the future. Despite tens of millions more votes.

I wonder if Manchin and Sinema have noticed, or just don't give a damn.

Midnight Writer

(21,753 posts)
5. If a citizen stands in the public square and voices his/her opinion, they stand exposed to all.
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 11:20 AM
Jul 2021

If an oligarch wants to start a phony astroturfed movement to push their agenda forward, they get to hide behind a wall of lawyers, of shell companies, and now, of government protection.

aocommunalpunch

(4,236 posts)
13. I agree.
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 01:36 PM
Jul 2021

Our opinions aren’t even whispers. TPTB work in a system of legalized bribery and people are being bought crazy cheap.

KS Toronado

(17,220 posts)
10. Appears the Koch brother's money even reaches into the SCOTUS.
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 12:55 PM
Jul 2021

And why not, they've bought off almost every reQublican congress person.

Ford_Prefect

(7,895 posts)
14. How do you think Roberts got the job in the first place?
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 01:42 PM
Jul 2021

David and Charles made a few phone calls, wrote a few checks, and squeezed a few people in sensitive areas.

KS Toronado

(17,220 posts)
18. Doesn't surprise me one bit, probably did so with every Supreme Court nominee.
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 03:29 PM
Jul 2021

On a side note, a perfect Ford is a 78/79 Bronco.

xxqqqzme

(14,887 posts)
20. Three who assisted Bush
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 04:28 PM
Jul 2021

(in Bush v Gore)
Chief Justice John Roberts

Roberts flew to Florida in November 2000 to assist Bush’s legal team. He helped prepare the lawyer who presented Bush’s case to the Florida state Supreme Court and offered advice throughout.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/17/politics/bush-v-gore-barrett-kavanaugh-roberts-supreme-court/index.html


Justice Brett Kavanaugh...
and
Judge Amy Coney Barrett

Deminpenn

(15,286 posts)
11. The fact that these donors feel themselves "in danger" if
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 12:59 PM
Jul 2021

their names are revealed says everything you need to know. If they weren't "do-badders", they wouldn't be worried about their names being made public.

JustABozoOnThisBus

(23,339 posts)
21. I donate to Planned Parenthood. Expose my name and address, ...
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 04:41 PM
Jul 2021

... and some "Proud Boys" or "Oath Keepers" or extreme Christian will sneak up and throw bricks through my windows.

I prefer giving in a more "low-key" manner, thanks.

And yes, Proud Boys would absolutely call me a "do-badder".

Deminpenn

(15,286 posts)
24. Jmho, but most of these organizations are in the dark money
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 05:58 PM
Jul 2021

business. They aren't trying to support anything except to enhance their own ability to escape accountability by hiding themselves.

Polybius

(15,398 posts)
25. Actually it would be 6-3, because Kennedy's seat was likely sold
Fri Jul 2, 2021, 03:20 PM
Jul 2021

Only conservatives would be Thomas, Alito, and Roberts.

LetMyPeopleVote

(145,168 posts)
27. I suspect that Kennedy would remain on the bench
Fri Jul 2, 2021, 03:36 PM
Jul 2021

Kennedy would be superior compared to the asshole/drunk who replaced him. 5 to 4 would be great with me

edhopper

(33,575 posts)
16. How is it free speech
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 02:55 PM
Jul 2021

if there is nobody hears it? If it is private, it has nothing to do with Free Speech.

And Speech is protected from Government censorship, NOT public consequences.

DallasNE

(7,403 posts)
17. Another Anti-Transparency Ruling Handed Down
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 03:26 PM
Jul 2021

The Sixth Amendment only applies to criminal trials but it grants the accused the right to be able to confront a witness. Here that principle is not in play as the donor can hide in the dark. I would like to confront those people in the pocket book but I can't because this ruling allows them to hide. It seems to me that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

dlk

(11,561 posts)
23. The conservative activists on the court have been chipping away at our democracy for decades
Thu Jul 1, 2021, 05:47 PM
Jul 2021

Their latest decisions to chip away at voting rights and campaign finance disclosures are more of their slicing the salami; chip a little of our democracy away here, chip a little more democracy away there, until nothing is left. It's time to expand the court to at least 13 justices, one for every appeals court circuit.

dsc

(52,160 posts)
26. Under this decision drug cartels from abroad
Fri Jul 2, 2021, 03:28 PM
Jul 2021

can give money to a dark money group to keep drugs illegal in our country, casinos can give money to dark money groups to keep other casinos from opening and there is literally nothing we can do about it.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court strikes dow...