- “Vetoing the Personal Privacy Protection Act leaves North Carolinians vulnerable to activist state employees and regulators who could pry into private nonprofit donor lists,” said Donald Bryson, CEO of the John Locke Foundation.
Gov. Josh Stein vetoed three bills on Wednesday, including one that protects the privacy of those who donate to charities.
SB 416, Personal Privacy Protection Act, adds civil penalties to current privacy law for government employees who attempt to pressure nonprofits into handing over their donor lists.
The bill would codify existing laws prohibiting state and local government agencies from collecting, disclosing, or demanding information that identifies a person’s association with a nonprofit organization.
Bill sponsors say the measure is designed to protect the privacy and speech rights of donors who make contributions to charity in either money or goods. The impact of nonprofit organizations on North Carolina’s economy is close to $510 billion in revenue, with North Carolinians contributing to a wide variety of groups, including the arts, religious groups, volunteer medical providers, youth programs, and social movements.
According to the bill’s text, “a public agency shall not require any entity organized under Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code to provide the public agency with personal information,” except when such disclosure is mandated by federal law, a subpoena, or a court order.
The bill also restricts public agencies from releasing donor-related information through public records requests, helping prevent breaches of confidentiality.
While critics of the bill have raised concerns about its potential impact on transparency — especially for nonprofits involved in political advocacy — the legislation maintains all existing campaign-finance disclosure requirements under state and federal law. It does not affect reporting obligations to the IRS or the State Board of Elections.
Cooper vetoed similar legislation in 2021
The North Carolina General Assembly passed a similar measure in 2021, but it was vetoed by then-Gov. Roy Cooper. Cooper claimed it would shield political “dark money” from public disclosure. However, neither that bill nor SB 416 changes the reporting requirements of political campaigns, including campaign finance disclosure laws.
Stein, a Democrat, echoed Cooper in his comments on why he vetoed the bill.
“Our democracy works best when people are well-informed,” he said in a press release. ”This bill reduces transparency and creates more opportunity for dark money in our politics, especially relating to candidates’ legal funds. Furthermore, it makes it difficult, if not impossible, for the Department of Revenue to identify and crack down on certain types of tax fraud.”
Supporters of the bill say donor privacy is critical for free association and free speech.
“Vetoing the Personal Privacy Protection Act leaves North Carolinians vulnerable to activist state employees and regulators who could pry into private nonprofit donor lists,” said Donald Bryson, CEO of the John Locke Foundation, in a press release. “The bill retained every existing nonprofit reporting requirement but erected a critical firewall forbidding any public agency or staffer from demanding or disclosing personal donor information—safeguards that are essential to a free democracy because they secure free association, free speech, and limited government.”
The legal and cultural foundation for donor privacy in the United States dates back to the civil rights era. In the landmark 1958 case NAACP v. Alabama, the US Supreme Court ruled that the state of Alabama could not compel the NAACP to disclose its membership lists. The court found that such disclosure would expose members and donors to harassment, threats, and violence, thereby violating their First Amendment rights to free speech and association.
This ruling established a critical precedent: Private support for controversial or minority causes deserves constitutional protection from compelled government disclosure.
More recently, donor privacy gained renewed legal standing in the 2021 US Supreme Court decision Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta. Under a California policy first enforced by then-Attorney General Kamala Harris, nonprofits were required to submit their donor lists to the state. Two nonprofit organizations — Americans for Prosperity Foundation and the Thomas More Law Center — challenged the requirement, arguing it chilled donor participation and posed serious risks of exposure.
In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court struck down California’s policy, finding it unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that “widespread disclosure of donor information is hardly necessary” for regulatory oversight and that the policy placed a heavy burden on individuals’ freedom to support causes anonymously.
The court ruled that any government-imposed donor disclosure must be narrowly tailored and serve a compelling interest. California, it found, failed to prove that its broad donor reporting requirement was necessary or effective.
stein vetoes bill allowing employees to carry weapons at nonpublic schools
He also vetoed HB 192, Firearm Law Revisions, which would allow employees and volunteers at nonpublic schools to carry weapons on school property if authorized by school officials. It would also allow a person to carry a concealed handgun on property shared by a school and a place of worship during religious services or functions. Also, the penalties for assaulting or threatening executive, legislative, court, or local elected officials are increased.
Stein said he vetoed the bill because it would make children less safe.
“Just as we should not allow guns in the General Assembly, we should keep them out of our schools unless they are in the possession of law enforcement,” he said in the release. “Law enforcement officers receive more than 800 hours of public safety education, including firearms training. On top of that, School Resource Officers receive additional training to know how to respond to crises and how to deescalate conflicts, a requirement I supported when I was Attorney General. We cannot substitute the protection offered by well-trained law enforcement officers by asking teachers and school volunteers to step in and respond to crises while armed.
The governor said last year an employee at a religious school in Goldsboro left a gun in a bathroom that was later found by an elementary school student.
But, he did say he supports the provision in this legislation to better protect local elected officials from threats to their safety, and urges the General Assembly to send him “a clean bill with those protections so I can sign it.”
HB 96 – remove squatters bill also vetoed due to added provision
Finally, Stein vetoed HB 96, Expedited Removal of Unauthorized Persons, because of an added provision.
“This legislation originally addressed squatters, and I supported it,” he said. “At the last moment, however, an unrelated amendment was added that prohibits local governments from regulating pet stores. This bill would facilitate inhumane puppy mills in North Carolina. Without this provision, I would sign the legislation. With it, I cannot support it.”