More people, more speech, and more time: Arizona’s Proposition 211 expands on previous donor disclosure laws in nearly every way.
That’s why the Institute for Free Speech filed an amicus brief in Americans for Prosperity v. Meyer urging the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to reverse the district court’s decision dismissing a First Amendment challenge to Arizona’s Proposition 211.
The Institute argues that Proposition 211 imposes sweeping disclosure rules unlike anything seen before, expanding on previous laws in almost every way. The law “covers more people, more speech,” and applies for a longer period of time than prior disclosure requirements.
By broadening all aspects of an ordinary disclosure rule, the brief notes that Proposition 211 “accomplishes a shift in kind, not merely degree.” As a result, “that shift in kind turns a series of individually problematic provisions into a cataclysmic First Amendment violation.”
“[T]he way in which Proposition 211 expands every facet of an ordinary disclosure rule fundamentally alters the analysis,” the brief notes. “Any decision on Proposition 211’s constitutionality must account for the sweeping and unprecedented First Amendment burdens created by the law’s cumulative effect.”
To read the Institute’s amicus brief in Americans for Prosperity v. Meyer, click here. To read our full press release, click here.
