The opinion was 6-3 along the Conservative-Liberal lines.
“The result is that California attracts sensitive donor information every year from tens of thousands of charities, even though that information will only become relevant in a small number of cases involving complaints filed,” the judge wrote in Chief John Roberts.
The campaign finance reform had expressed fears that such a move would eventually lead to more anonymous money – called black money – to enter the political sphere.
The case had pitted the interest of charities in preserving the privacy of their donors against the interest of states in controlling charitable fraud.
The challenge to state law has been brought by conservative nonprofits American for Prosperity Foundation (a group affiliated with Koch) and the Thomas More Law Center, who want to keep the identities of their donors a secret and have argued that the state had failed to demonstrate a convincing commitment. because of the law.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the minority, suggested that the majority’s decision could impact donor disclosures in the political sphere, allowing more anonymous money. She said the majority marked disclosure requirements with a “bull’s-eye”.
She said the court is “trading precision for brute force” and creating a “significant risk that it will overturn disclosure regimes that should be constitutional.”
This story is out and will be updated.