Try 1 month for 99¢

OLYMPIA — A split Washington Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the attorney general’s office can pursue a campaign finance disclosure case against the conservative Evergreen Freedom Foundation.

The 5-4 majority rejected the group’s assertion that the disclosure requirements did not apply to local initiatives before they’re placed on the ballot.

The Freedom Foundation had provided free legal services to citizens in Sequim, Shelton and Chelan who gathered signatures for measures that would make collective bargaining sessions with public employee unions open to the public.

The measures were not accepted for the ballots in those cities, however, and their proponents sued the cities — with the Freedom Foundation’s help — in an effort to force public votes on the measures.

In 2015, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson sued, saying the organization should have reported the legal help to the Public Disclosure Commission as a campaign contribution. A Thurston County Superior Court judge threw out the lawsuit, saying state law was vague on whether the contributions needed to be reported, but an appeals court overturned that decision.

State law explicitly says that after a measure has been submitted to an elections official, donations to that campaign must be reported. That applies to statewide initiative measures, which must be reviewed by the secretary of state’s office before proponents can gather signatures.

But for some local initiatives, supporters don’t turn them in until after they’ve collected signatures. The Freedom Foundation argued that it wasn’t required to report its contributions because the local measures hadn’t yet been approved for the ballot.

The majority disagreed. Justice Barbara Madsen wrote that state disclosure law must be interpreted broadly to promote transparency in political campaigns.

Subscribe to Breaking News

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

“Washington law has demanding but clear campaign finance disclosure requirements, and the Supreme Court confirmed that today,” Ferguson said.

The dissent, authored by Justice Sheryl Gordon McCloud, insisted that the law did not clearly require the Freedom Foundation to report the expenses, and that because the organization’s First Amendment rights were involved, the burden should have been on the government to prove that the reporting was required.

The Freedom Foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The organization could appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.


Load comments