Quote of the Day
SCOTUS decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. NJ is huge. Despite the iconic SCOTUS decision in NAACP v. Alabama, and the more recent decision in Americans for Prosperity Fdn v. Bonta, many lower courts have continued to insist that compelled disclosure of one’s affiliations is not a harm that can even support a challenge to the government’s actions.
Yesterday the Supreme Court firmly rejected that approach:
“Demands for private donor information … ‘chill’ protected 1st Amendment associational rights even when those demands contemplate disclosure only to government officials and not ‘the general public. …“An injury in fact does not arise only when a defendant causes a tangible harm to a plaintiff, like a physical injury or monetary loss. It can also arise when a defendant burdens a plaintiff ’s constitutional rights. And our cases have long recognized that demands for a charity’s private member or donor information have just that effect.”
This is a huge win for privacy and freedom, a huge blow to those who seek to “cancel” individuals or intimidate them from participating in public debate with threats of government retaliation, direct or indirect.
Brad Smith @CommishSmith
Posted on X, April 30, 2026
This is great news. For years the anti-gun people wanted the NRA membership list. This should at least slow them down. Of course, pro-gun people cannot get the anti-gun organization lists either. But then, that is only a few thousand people compared to the millions of people who belong to the CCRKBA, FPC, GOA, NRA, SAF, etc. And the anti-gun people are becoming less and less irrelevant.
As Mark Smith at The Four Boxes Diner says, “The trend is our friend.”
It also demonstrates that most courts have no respect for the Constitution, or for binding precedent. Not if it gets in the way of their left wing ideology.
I’m unaware of paid memberships to the graboids “organizations”. Some chumps donate, but their “member lists” would be mostly “people” that follow on social media.
I think you meant “less and less RELEVANT” in the next-to-last line.
This has been Supreme Court precedent since 1958 in NAACP v Alabama. NAACP cited danger to its members if the list were disclosed. With the current assassination cult on the left, that would seem to apply today. I am not really sure why this came up again.