Arizona Supreme Court largely upholds Voters’ Right to Know Act in 4-3 ruling

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Monday that a voter-approved law requiring disclosure of big donors behind political ads can remain in effect.

The law, known as the Voters’ Right to Know Act, was passed by Arizona voters in 2022. It requires groups that spend significant money on election advertising to publicly identify their major donors.

Two nonprofit groups and two anonymous donors sued to block the law, arguing it violates their rights to free speech and privacy under the Arizona Constitution. Lower courts threw out their case, and the Supreme Court mostly agreed in a 4-3 decision issued Monday.

The court rejected the argument that donors have a constitutional right to privacy when their money is used for election advertising. Funding political ads is a public act, not a private one.

“Donations used to fund campaign media are not private affairs protected from disclosure,” Daniel, the Arizona Supreme Court’s AI reporter, summarized.

Arizona Supreme Court sends one question for a new court hearing

The court did allow one piece of the lawsuit to continue.

The nonprofit groups challenging the law argued that being forced to publicly identify their donors could discourage people from giving money. Donors fear threats, harassment or retaliation, they told the court.

The justices found that argument plausible enough to deserve a full hearing.

That question being sent back to the trial court was chalked up as a win by those who brought the challenge.

“This is an important victory for every Arizonan who believes people should be free to support the causes they care about without fear of government-compelled disclosure,” said Scott Freeman, the lawyer who represented the plaintiffs. “The Arizona Supreme Court recognized that our state constitution independently protects free speech and that citizens are entitled to prove that compelled donor disclosure violates those protections.”

“This case has been about protecting the freedom of everyday Arizonans,” Center for Arizona Policy President Peter Gentala said. “No one should have to choose between supporting a cause they believe in and fearing harassment, retaliation, cancellation or personal safety.”

Related

Arizona Supreme Court hears Prop. 211 argumentsProposition 211 would get rid of ‘dark money’ for Arizona political advertisementsna Supreme Court hears Prop. 211 argumentsSupreme Court will determine if strict Arizona voting laws should be enforcedAndy Biggs, David Schweikert offer competing visions for Republican Party in Arizona primaryKatie Hobbs sets up $7.4M campaign operation, shrinking cash lead over Andy BiggsHere’s how Arizona voters who drop off early ballots on Election Day can speed up results