September 8, 2025

Supreme Court

People United for Privacy: PUFPF Files Amicus Brief Defending Nonprofit Donor Rights at the Supreme Court

By Luke Wachob

.....People United for Privacy Foundation filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin. The case, which will be heard in the Court’s upcoming Fall 2025 term, could produce the most significant Supreme Court ruling concerning the privacy rights of nonprofit members and donors in several years.

The case arose after New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin issued a subpoena to First Choice seeking access to the nonprofit’s donor list, among other sensitive information. First Choice challenged the subpoena in federal court, arguing that its members have a First Amendment right to privately associate with the group. Despite strong Supreme Court precedents upholding donors’ right to privacy, the district court dismissed the case, reasoning that only state courts may enforce or quash a subpoena. That dismissal was upheld by the Third Circuit, which ruled that First Choice’s affidavit did “not yet show enough of an injury” to enter federal court.

PUFPF’s brief warns that the Third Circuit and other lower courts have effectively defanged Supreme Court precedents protecting nonprofit donor privacy. In the 2021 case Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFPF) v. Bonta, the Court clarified that states carry the burden of showing a need to identify a nonprofit’s members and supporters. By requiring plaintiffs to demonstrate that disclosure will harm their members or organizations – as the Third, Sixth, and Ninth circuits have since done – lower courts have reversed the burden and contradicted the Court’s analysis.

The Courts

Just the News: Minnesota school district punished pro-deportation teacher for 'disruption,’ lawsuit alleges

By Greg Piper

.....School districts often admonish teachers to be careful how they represent themselves on social media, especially by not identifying themselves with the district or posting during work hours, so as not to create headaches with parents and community members.

But what happens when the district itself adds fuel to a small controversy, then punishes a teacher who did everything right for the disruption the district caused?

Minnesota's Prior Lake-Savage Area Schools unconstitutionally suspended award-winning teacher Brooke Zahn without pay for her post in a private Facebook group, under her maiden name and from her home, which it obtained from progressive activists and then showed to families with children in her school and all district employees, Zahn's lawsuit says.

Congress

New York Times: U.S. Is Increasingly Exposed to Chinese Election Threats, Lawmakers Say

By Julian E. Barnes

.....Democratic lawmakers warned on Friday that severe staff cuts at an intelligence office that monitors foreign threats to U.S. elections would leave the country vulnerable to interference and subversion from Beijing, as Chinese companies use artificial intelligence as a new weapon in information warfare.

In a letter to Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois and André Carson of Indiana cited a New York Times story about technology developed by the Chinese company GoLaxy that aims to use artificial intelligence to make influence and information operations far more effective.

Donor Privacy

New York Times: Inside Gavin Newsom’s Redistricting Cash Blitz

By Theodore Schleifer, Shane Goldmacher, and Laurel Rosenhall

.....But many Democratic donors, including those on the August call with Mr. Newsom, privately say they are holding back. Mr. Newsom’s team has been frustrated at times by the pace of Democratic giving, according to people close to the team, which they attribute to both the hangover of the 2024 election and to Mr. Trump’s retribution campaign against his enemies — particularly important in a state that requires the public disclosure of donors’ names.

The States

Goldwater Institute: Donor Privacy Heads to the Arizona Supreme Court

.....Donors to non-profit organizations in Arizona have a target on their backs, all because of a 2022 state law that requires those groups to disclose their donors’ personal information, including their names and addresses to the government. The Goldwater Institute is fighting back in a case set to be argued before the Arizona Supreme Court on Sept. 11—and it’s a decision that could have national implications.

That law is Proposition 211, and it is an affront to the freedom of speech and association, and a veiled attempt by activists to muzzle their political opponents by intimidating them into silence. It is well documented that disclosure mandates in other states have led to attacks against nonprofits and their supporters.

The Goldwater Institute sued the Arizona Secretary of State and the Arizona Clean Elections Commission behalf of the Center for Arizona Policy and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club in December 2022. It will argue before the Arizona Supreme Court that the Arizona Constitution forbids the state from stripping people of their privacy for supporting causes in which they believe. The Arizona Constitution provides stronger protections for freedom of speech and privacy than even the U.S. Constitution.

The City: The Secret Bundlers Behind Eric Adams’ Campaign Fundraising Revealed

By Greg B. Smith and Yoav Gonen 

.....John Kaehny, director of the watchdog group Reinvent Albany, noted that illegal straw donations — contributions that mask the true identity of the donor — are usually gathered by intermediaries, disclosed or not.

“Almost all straw donor scams are done by bundlers,” he said. “Bundler disclosure is like a trip wire for straw donors. If the bundler is disclosed, it’s easy to review who they raised contributions from. If the bundler is not reported, but campaign officials detect a cluster of straw donors, it gives campaign finance officials probable cause to issue subpoenas to find out what’s going on and a specific legal reason to deny a campaign public matching funds.”

Michigan Advance: Michigan GOP representative’s earmark request raises questions on loopholes in new ethics rules

By Ben Solis

.....The wealthy owner of the Dort Financial Center made a large political contribution to a Michigan Republican lawmaker a month after that official requested a $2.5 million earmark to renovate areas of the facility located in Flint.

And while the earmark ultimately was not included in the GOP-led Michigan House budget proposal delivered on Tuesday, the request appeared to skirt newly instituted House ethics rules that ban legislatively appropriated grants to for-profit entities.