First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport · ¶39
A more general principle, too, confirms the specific lesson our cases teach on this score. Across contexts, we have said, courts may make “commonsense inferences” when assessing Article III standing, including inferences about “third party behavior.” Diamond Alternative Energy, 606 U. S., at 116. And “organizations span[ning] the ideological spectrum” confirm the reasonableness of the inferences our cases have drawn about the burdens that demands for private donor information inevitably impose on protected First Amendment rights. AFP, 594 U. S., at 617. Groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the National Taxpayers Union Foundation to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- day Saints have fled briefs in this case explaining that, “[e]ven if a subpoena targeting First Amendment activity is never enforced in court, [it] will give its targets a very good reason to clam up…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.