Nonprofits See Threats to Privacy Ahead of 2024 Elections
Americans vote in private booths, but their support for nonprofits that educate voters may soon be made public.
Presidential election years bring heightened attention to many causes and controversies. That makes them a peak period for nonprofits that rally citizens to engage on public policy issues. Some of these groups, like the NAACP or the NRA, have existed for over a century. Others, like Asian Americans Advancing Justice and Moms for Liberty, are relative newcomers to the scene but widely relied upon by Americans with similar views.
In many states, however, the ability of nonprofits to speak freely about government policies and the actions of elected officials is under threat. Politicians from both parties aim to choke nonprofits in red tape while exposing the sensitive personal information of their supporters, such as their name and home address. These laws, often promoted as a means of exposing so-called “dark money,” are harmful to both personal privacy and free speech.
My organization, People United for Privacy, recently identified no fewer than 31 states presenting potential threats to nonprofit donor privacy in the 2024 legislative sessions. They include 14 states where Democrats control the legislature, 12 where Republicans are in control, and 5 where control is shared. The lesson: Long-held privacy rights are under attack in blue states, red states, and purple states.
Americans of all backgrounds and beliefs depend on having their privacy protected when joining or donating to nonprofit groups. Privacy protects us from having our personal information taken and exploited when we support an organization doing important work in our community. Crucially, privacy also protects us from harassment and retaliation at the hands of corrupt government officials and extremists on both sides of the aisle.
No one should face intimidation at their home or efforts to fire them from their job because they supported a nonprofit that criticized a powerful politician. No one has to like or agree with a nonprofit’s opinions, either, but the proper response for politicians and citizens alike is to make their case to the public. The answer to speech we dislike should be more speech, not doxing and harassment.
Perhaps because Americans treasure their privacy and free speech rights, many threats are disguised. For instance, some state legislation is pitched as targeting foreign donors. Yet, such bills often define “foreign-influenced” so broadly that American companies run by American executives would be forced to stop donating to nonprofits if even 1% of their shares are foreign-owned. These laws can silence American companies and deprive important causes of the resources they have used for generations to serve and advocate for their members.
One of the fastest growing threats to privacy is Arizona’s recently adopted “Voters’ Right to Know Act.” Promoted as a means of disclosing hidden campaign donors, the law broadly redefined what actions and speech constitute “campaign media spending.” Now, standard advocacy practices used by nonprofits to support or oppose legislation are likely to trigger public disclosure of their supporters’ identities and addresses.
As groups in Arizona scramble to make sense of the law, anti-privacy activists are already working feverishly to export the scheme to other states like Oregon and Oklahoma. Yet, it is politicians, not voters, who truly want to know who funds nonprofit causes. In the words of one North Dakota legislator who supported a nonprofit disclosure bill in 2023: “I need to know who my enemies are.”
Not convinced? Take it from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. He bragged over a decade ago that the “deterrent effect” of forcing nonprofits to out their members “should not be underestimated.” In other words, disclosure will force nonprofits to self-censor, and politicians know it.
Fortunately, there is simultaneously a growing privacy movement spreading across the country. Since 2018, 17 states have adopted proactive laws prohibiting government agencies from seizing or exposing Americans’ personal information when supporting a nonprofit cause. In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court reiterated the importance of nonprofit donor privacy in striking down a California mandate that forced charities to hand over their donor rolls to state officials. That outcome was supported by nearly 300 organizations with a diverse array of views, all of whom joined together to support robust privacy protections for nonprofits and their supporters.
Despite these victories, new threats to privacy continue to emerge. During an election year that promises to bring vigorous debate about a wide range of issues, nonprofits must be vigilant that their voices – and their members – are protected.
Matt Nese is Vice President of People United for Privacy.
