Erik Jaffe discusses Americans for Prosperity v. Bonta with Federalist Society

​Erik Jaffe, policy director of Protect The 1st, examines the many complexities in the “fractured” opinions in the recent 6-3 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Americans for Prosperity v. Bonta.
 
In a presentation and question-and-answer podcast with the Federalist Society, Jaffe discusses the Supreme Court’s ruling that a California policy mandating disclosure of the identities of anonymous donors to the state government is facially invalid because it burdens donors’ First Amendment rights; and, because it is not narrowly tailored to an important government interest.
 

• Jaffe discusses the various levels of scrutiny that are applied in First Amendment law and how Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Clarence Thomas differ on applying scrutiny in this case.

 

• He also discusses the dissenting opinion, written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, which accepted at face value California’s promise not to divulge donor information, despite such breaches in the past.

 
“California has a long history of harassing, disclosing and failing to enforce the law regarding donor information,” Jaffe says.