An overlooked but significant victory for nonprofits and their supporters occurred in Congress this week. The appropriations bill President Trump signed into law on February 3 to end a partial government shutdown contains several key provisions protecting the privacy of Americans and nonprofit organizations. As in previous years, these protections passed both chambers of Congress with strong bipartisan support.

The pro-privacy budget riders in the bill, H.R. 7148, are as follows:

• Prohibits the IRS from writing new regulations to limit political speech and force donor disclosure from nonprofit groups (Sec. 123 on pp. 275-276 of the Enrolled bill text).
• Prohibits the SEC from requiring businesses to disclose their giving to political causes, tax-exempt organizations, and trade associations (Sec. 632 on p. 319 of the Enrolled bill).
• Prohibits the President from issuing an Executive Order to require government contractors to detail their political and issue advocacy as a condition of bidding on a government contract (Sec. 735 on pp. 327-328).

These policy riders have earned consistent support in Congress since their origin over a decade ago. They were conceived as a defense against an intense pressure campaign to weaponize federal agencies against nonprofits and companies in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. FEC. Opponents of that decision, including some members of Congress, leaned on the IRS, the SEC, and the White House itself to deter private entities from exercising their freshly restored First Amendment rights.

The most infamous result of this intimidation campaign was the IRS Tea Party targeting scandal. In that calamity, IRS leaders buckled to political pressure and applied undue scrutiny to conservative organizations applying for nonprofit status. The agency subjected conservatives to lengthy delays in the processing of routine paperwork and invasive questioning about their beliefs, activities, and members. As Congress and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) worked to clean up the mess, the IRS doubled down by proposing harsh new restrictions on political speech by nonprofits. The ham-fisted proposal earned harsh criticism from across the political spectrum.

At that point, Congress realized that the agency could not be trusted to respect the First Amendment rights of nonprofits and their donors to participate in political debates. As a result, lawmakers created the policy rider that prevents the IRS from rewriting current rules governing nonprofit political speech and disclosure. Those rules are far from perfect, but reforming them should involve Congress, not solely the whims of unelected bureaucrats in an agency that lacks First Amendment expertise and has a proven track record of trampling free speech rights.

Undeterred, the politicians and activists who implored the IRS to play speech police did not stop there. They also pressured the SEC to require businesses to expose the details of their giving to nonprofits, trade associations, and political causes. In the early days of cancel culture, the goal of these disclosures was no secret: Activists wanted to make enemies lists of companies that backed the ‘wrong’ groups and then pressure them to stop giving.

So strong was the desire to snatch those lists that a coalition of left-wing groups once bought every single ad in the DC Metro station closest to the SEC’s headquarters for a month-long campaign aimed at one person: then-SEC Chair Mary Jo White. The comic-style ads attempted both obsequious praise (“Mary Jo White is the superhero we need to end this menace”) and a bit of taunting criticism for her inaction (“Where is Mary Jo White?”). Fortunately, White was not so easily swayed, and the SEC avoided the devastating errors that further tarnished the IRS’s reputation. Nevertheless, the budget rider prohibiting the SEC from using taxpayer funds to develop new disclosure mandates is an important protection against future efforts to weaponize the SEC for political gain.

Leaving no stone unturned, anti-privacy activists also lobbied the White House to issue an executive order requiring similar disclosures from businesses that bid on government contracts. This idea met swift criticism from members of both parties, who raised concerns that these disclosures would politicize the government contracting process. To prevent corrupt officials from steering important government contracts to political allies and freezing out opponents, businesses must retain the ability to keep their donations private. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed, the Obama White House never issued that executive order, and the budget rider ensures it stays off the table.

These three policy riders form an important shield against future targeting scandals and power-grabs threatening core political speech rights, regardless of what party is in power. Their passage marks an expected but important victory for privacy rights cherished by the nonprofit sector and all Americans who wish to support the causes of their choice privately.