This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Tuesday, September 14th, 2021.

I'm Caleb Brown.

The political speech case of AFPF v Banta attracted a wide variety of briefs from non-profits seeking to keep their donors more private

in opposition to a California policy demanding lists of donors.

Bradley Smith is the chairman of the Institute for Free Speech, which challenged that same California

policy years earlier.

We discussed the Banta decision late last month.

AFPSV Banta was, I guess guess a pretty high profile blockbuster case.

People who like giving money to nonprofits probably felt pretty good about the

decision that is protecting donor privacy from the prying

eyes of state governments at the very least. What was your sense of that and I know

that IFS had a case that was strikingly similar to the AFPF case, maybe a year or two earlier.

Yeah, in fact, just as this background and lay my cards on the table the Institute for Free Speech had

filed a suit challenging the practice on a facial basis.

In other words, just saying it's unconstitutional for everybody.

We lost in the district court and in the Ninth Circuit

and appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held our case in abeyance

while they heard the case of Americans for Prosperity

Foundation and the Thomas More Legal Center to hear those two cases, which those cases

actually were what are called

S-applied challenges in the law.

...