The long-simmering legal battle over Arizona’s worst-in-the-nation disclosure law for nonprofit donors has finally heated up.

On September 11, the Arizona Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Center for Arizona Policy v. Fontes, a case that challenges the law as a violation of the Arizona Constitution’s guarantees for free speech. Just weeks later, on September 29, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a separate challenge, brought by leaders of the Arizona House and Senate, could move forward. That case challenges the law, which passed via a ballot initiative in 2022, as a violation of separation of powers and an improper delegation of the legislature’s lawmaking authority.

Meanwhile, a third case looms in the background, challenging the law in federal court as a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

So, what makes Arizona’s doxing law so objectionable? Simple: It employs the language of campaign finance regulation to cloak an assault on nonprofit organizations and their supporters. Federal law – and most states – force campaign groups to disclose their donors and spending while generally leaving nonprofits free to advocate around issues and legislation. Arizona’s law seeks to dissolve that distinction and impose widespread regulation and donor disclosure requirements on virtually all organizations that speak about state government.

The law accomplishes this scheme through a variety of means: a radically expandsive definition of “campaign media spending” that transforms longstanding nonprofit advocacy practices into regulated activities that trigger donor disclosure; an “original source” disclosure requirement that forces groups to report not only their donors, but their donors’ donors; and a requirement that groups make targets out of their supporters by listing them individually on the face of their ads. Altogether, the law makes Arizona arguably the most difficult state in the nation for nonprofits to speak about state government while keeping their supporters safe from exposure, retaliation, and potential violence.

People United for Privacy Foundation (PUFPF) has long warned about how vague and overbroad terms in campaign finance laws enable opportunistic politicians and overzealous bureaucrats to target nonprofits and their donors. Many states have outdated or unclear campaign finance laws that can become weapons against free speech in the wrong hands. That’s why PUFPF helps state lawmakers clean up old laws and pass new privacy protections for nonprofit members, donors, and volunteers.

Unfortunately, few Arizona nonprofits saw the danger coming in 2022. Groups that advocate on issues were mostly lulled into a false sense of security by rhetoric that suggested the law was only targeted at campaign spending. Since its passage and implementation, however, frustration from the nonprofit community has steadily increased as the law’s true reach and impact has started to become clear.

Hopefully, the Arizona Supreme Court issues a strong opinion defending nonprofit donor privacy and free speech in Center for Arizona Policy v. Fontes. If not, however, privacy advocates will get several more bites at this rotten apple.