Group fights disclosing donors behind Sandoval ads

By David McGrath Schwartz

Tuesday, June 1, 2010 | 9 p.m.

CARSON CITY — Lawyers for a group that ran television ads promoting Brian Sandoval’s conservative credentials argued on Tuesday that they should not be forced to disclose their donor lists because the ads don’t explicitly tell people to vote for the former federal judge.

Jason Torchinsky, an attorney representing the Virginia-based Alliance for America’s Future, said that the disclosure “would chill our ability to find donors in the future.”

He pointed to cases in other states where political donors have faced retaliation for their campaign contributions.

The Alliance for America’s Future ran ads earlier this election that said Sandoval was a conservative, was against “job-killing tax increases” and touted his conservative positions.

The alliance spent $250,000 for an 11-day ad buy supporting Sandoval, who has been under attack by the group Committee to Protect Nevada Jobs, which is being funded and led by Democrats. The ad buy stopped May 25, though Torchinsky said the group had considered airing those ads again before Tuesday’s primary. Sandoval is the frontrunner to unseat fellow Republican Gov. Jim Gibbons on the ballot.

Directors for the alliance include former Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughter, Mary Cheney, and Kara Ahern, his political director.

Nevada District Court Judge James E. Wilson last week granted a temporary restraining order that had been sought by the secretary of state. Secretary of State Ross Miller said the ads were clearly meant to influence a Nevada election in favor of Sandoval.

After listening to oral arguments this afternoon, Wilson said he will make a ruling by Wednesday.

The ad, according to Torchinsky, “was educating the public on positions.” Wilson asked, “Can you tell me with a straight face the intent was not to get people to vote for Mr. Sandoval?”

Torchinsky said he would hesitate to say that. “I’ve not asked my client that question,” he said.

Kerry Benson, deputy attorney general representing the secretary of state, argued that the state was not seeking to prevent speech, but to find out who was funding the ads.

“It’s important to understand who is behind speech, so people can determine what kind of credence to give to the group behind the speech,” she said.

“Just because the ad didn’t use the term ‘elect Brian Sandoval’ doesn’t make the meaning any less clear. Voters are entitled to know where messages are coming from.”

Sandoval’s campaign has said they are unaffiliated with the group.