The billionaire Koch brothers beat back a move to inject more transparency into the duo’s shadowy electioneering activities, after a district court ruled that more disclosures about donors funding a group run by the pair could violate the First Amendment.
California’s Attorney General Kamala Harris attempted to force the Koch Brothers’ deep-pocketed political action committee, American for Prosperity (AFP), to reveal information about its donors in accordance with California law. Although the group had skirted the requirement in previous years, the Attorney General, beginning in 2013, informed the organization that it would have to fill out disclosure documents in order to keep its tax-exempt status.
But this week, US District Judge Manuel Real said such an obligation “would have a chilling effect on free speech.” He blocked Harris from moving forward with the requirement.
In court filings published Thursday by Courthouse News, AFP claimed it had to “guard the confidentiality of its donors to ensure their safety.” The group went on to allege that “Grotesque threats have been leveled against known associates of the foundation, ranging from threats to kill or maim, to threats to firebomb buildings.”
There have been zero reported instances of violence or vandalism specifically related to an individual’s membership in AFP.
The group also claimed that releasing the names of their donors could lead to “boycotts, firings, and public shaming, all of which are now demonstrated components of the playbook of the foundation’s more extreme opponents.”
Harris found AFP’s arguments absurd. She informed the court that the disclosure information about donors “is and always has been kept secret.” She added further that “reporting information about contributors helps protect the public welfare by ensuring that organizations are not abusing their charitable and exempt designations.”
Should any wrongdoing be alleged, Harris argued, the reporting information could be used by law enforcement to investigate “self-dealing and other violations.”
But the court rejected those arguments, saying the interests of the state was not compelling enough, and that the Attorney General’s oversight goals can be accomplished via “numerous less intrusive alternatives.”
Unmentioned in the back-and-forth about competing interests was that of voters who will be inundated with ever-increasing political advertising through scarce media, much of which is being financed by unknown individuals with undisclosed agendas.
Earlier this year, the Koch brothers themselves announced their intention to spend $889 million during the 2016 election cycle, which is more money than either the Republican or Democratic National Committees spent in the 2012 campaign.
Some of that money will, in all likelihood, go to opposing Harris herself. The Attorney General is campaigning to win the Senate seat that will be vacated next year at the end of the 114th Congress by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).
Americans for Prosperity alone spent more than $36 million boosting the election hopes of Republican candidates in 2012.
