Ninth Circuit Upholds Arizona Dark Money Disclosure Law
The Ninth Circuit rejected Americans for Prosperity's First Amendment challenge to Proposition 211, leaving Arizona's donor-disclosure regime live through the November midterms and potentially a template for other states.
In Americans for Prosperity v. Meyer (No. 24-2933, Sept. 30, 2026), the Ninth Circuit upheld Arizona's Proposition 211, rejecting arguments that its campaign-finance disclosure rules chill speech and impair free association. The panel described the statute's interest in informing voters as vital, called the burdens modest, and found the requirements narrowly tailored under exacting scrutiny, relying on Citizens United and NRSC v. FEC. Disclosure attaches when a covered person spends more than $50,000 statewide or $25,000 in any other race on campaign media spending, and reaches donors of more than $5,000 in traced original monies, intermediaries above $2,500, with ad disclaimers naming the three largest funders. Spending a group's own funds on advertising is outside the regime, and donors may opt out, though Akin reports some organizations simply decline opted-out gifts.
Why it matters: corporate and foundation donors to politically active 501(c)(4)s, and the intermediaries receiving those funds, now face disclosure consequences in Arizona alone, and parallel regimes may follow elsewhere. Clients funding state-level advertising should trace payment chains, review written opt-out notices, and check the law in every state where money moves before the midterms. Watch for a certiorari petition and its effect on pending cases.