Quote of the day

Apparently, the Supreme Court has decided that what the Constitution *really meant* all along was “disclosure for thee, but not for the VIPs with checkbooks the size of small nations.” Because despite decades of rulings affirming that states can, in fact, require donor transparency to keep democracy from smelling like week old fish, the Court has now treated California’s disclosure law—originally enforced back when Kamala Harris was state attorney general—as though it were some kind of unconstitutional boogeyman hiding under a billionaire’s bed. Maybe I’m reading the Constitution wrong, but I’m fairly certain the “informational interest” the Court once praised didn’t mean “voters get information only when it’s convenient for wealthy donors,” yet here we are, pretending that sunlight is dangerous and secrecy is patriotic.

~Lenore Schille