Dark money law challenge shot down by Arizona judge
Groups are required to reveal political donors
A Maricopa County judge rejected a lawsuit challenging a new law requiring so-called dark money groups to expose their political donors.
Judge Scott McCoy on Wednesday ruled the Center for Arizona Policy and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club are not immune from Proposition 211, which won more than 70% voter approval in the 2022 election. The measure garnered wide support with its argument that the public has a right to know who is funding anonymous political messages from vaguely named committees.
The campaign drew support from both sides of the political aisle. It was co-chaired by former Democratic Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard and endorsed by one of his political rivals, former Republican Gov. Fife Symington.
But the conservative organizations, represented by the Goldwater Institute, said the voter-approved initiative infringed on their free speech rights because it would deter donors who were afraid of publicizing their political views.
McCoy ruled against their initial lawsuit last year, but gave the organizations the opportunity to file an amended complaint based on the application of the law.
His Wednesday decision said the groups ultimately failed to establish “a reasonable probability” of donor “harassment and intimidation,” even after Center for Arizona President Cathi Herrod and Free Enterprise Club Executive Director Scot Mussi testified they and their staff have often received offensive messages and remarks.
That includes everything from messages to Herrod stating “I hope you die of cancer” to a Free Enterprise Club staffer who “had her car vandalized at the legislature,” per court minutes. But McCoy noted the groups identified few specific acts or threats of violence against their staff and donors, and that both organizations have their staffers’ names and other identifying information publicly available on their websites.
“Such name calling, offensive comments and criticism are certainly rude,” McCoy wrote. “Many of the comments themselves, however, are protected speech.”
Scott Freeman, a senior attorney at the Goldwater Institute, said through a spokesperson that he and his clients “respectfully disagree” with McCoy’s ruling and plan to appeal.
What does the ruling mean for 2024?
This election cycle will be the first in which the ballot measure, also known as the Citizens’ Right to Know Act, will be in effect.
It requires disclosure of any individual who makes a financial contribution of $5,000 or more to a committee that spends at least $50,000 on a statewide or legislative ad campaign. For local elections, those amounts are lower — $2,500 for any individual donation to a campaign spending at least $25,000.
The Citizens Clean Elections Commission has the power to interpret the rules and enforce them.
Under previously existing law, anyone who gives $50 or more directly to a candidate must provide their name, address and occupation to the candidate’s campaign for public disclosure. That will continue.
The new law applies to corporations, nonprofit groups and charities that until now have not been required to disclose the names of the people who give money to political campaigns that the organization backs.
That is widely expected to shed new light on the donors behind political advertisements and some of the biggest campaigns on Arizonans’ ballots.