At a recent hearing, numerous attorneys and First Amendment scholars provided testimony on the IRS’s proposed change to eliminate the requirement that certain exempt organizations disclose the names and addresses of contributors. Former Federal Election Commission Commissioner Hans A. von Spakovsky, of the Heritage Foundation, highlighted the burden put on nonprofits as well as the First Amendment and privacy implications of disclosure in his testimony:

A couple weeks ago the IRS held a hearing on the “Reporting Requirements of Exempt Organizations.”  This hearing is especially timely in light of the rise of the violent Bernie Bros which was an issue in last night’s Democrat debate.  Retribution against supporters of issue groups on the opposite side of the spectrum is on the rise.  As Allen Dickerson of the Institute for Free Speech wrote in their official comments:

A 2017 poll by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that “more than half of Americans say the political polarization of the nation is extremely or very threatening, and another 34 percent say it is moderately threatening” to the American way of life.

In the coming months, the United States Supreme Court will grant or deny certiorari in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Becerra, a case from the Ninth Circuit that has gathered an impressive amount of attention due to its First Amendment implications and threat to donor privacy.

This past month, Democrat Representative Joaquin Castro released the names of Trump donors in San Antonio in a heated tweet claiming they are “fueling a campaign of hate.”

In natural form, the liberal mob immediately went on attack and began harassing these people.

It’s hard to imagine a scenario where Rep. Castro did not intend for the donors to be harassed. Why else would he publicly chastise them?

House Democrats and their most loyal liberal allies are attempting in multiple different ways to effectively repeal the First Amendment.  By taking away donor privacy and controlling how money is spent.  The effort was their top priority as shown by the very symbolically numbered HR 1.  As Real Clear Politics describes it:

Now that Republicans have lost their longstanding majority in the New York Senate, New York rushed through several election "reforms" at the beginning of the legislative session, with no committee hearing process or input from the public.  The package of legislation* was introduced on January 10, passed the Assembly and Senate on January 14, and was signed by the Governor on January 24.  This likely foreshadows how the Democrats will rush House Resolution 1 through the House on the federal level, though fortunately, the Republican majority in the Senate under the leadership of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will block its harmful provisions from becoming law on the federal level.