Your free speech or your privacy. Last year, the Rio Grande Foundation argued against soda taxes and the City of Sante Fe responded by demanding its donors. So, writes Paul Gessing, Rio Grande is suing for its First Amendment rights:
“Literally the same day that we announced our public education campaign, the Santa Fe city attorney notified us that if we spent more than $250 on certain advertising tools that so much as ‘refers to a clearly identifiable ballot measure within 60 days’ of it being on the ballot, we would be compelled to hand over a list of our donors for publication on a government database. […]
“As a 501(c)(3) organization under the IRS Code, the Rio Grande Foundation’s donors — like Planned Parenthood’s or the NAACP’s — are not public information. In fact, back in 1958, the NAACP’s right to keep its donor list private was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“And while the Rio Grande Foundation’s donors may not face such extreme threats were it forced to disclose its donors, there are plenty of politicians who would love to silence the Rio Grande Foundation, not to mention Planned Parenthood or other nonprofit organizations, by intimidating their supporters.
“Ultimately, as the media reported, while we dutifully kept our outright expenditures below $250 as prescribed by law, the Rio Grande Foundation was deemed to be in violation of the law due to the aforementioned video and website. These were ‘in-kind’ donations to the Foundation, but because their value clearly exceeded $250, we were deemed to be violating the law.
“We don’t think that’s right. We strongly believe that the First Amendment protects the speech in which we engaged relating to the soda tax measure. We also believe in respecting and adhering to donor privacy, as any donor to a 501(c)(3) has come to expect.” [NMPolitics.net]
