The Trump Transition Team Is Right To Protect Donors’ Privacy

Despite losing an election where accusations of weaponizing the government against political opponents featured prominently, Democrats are once again attempting to dox Trump supporters. Their latest focus is the nonprofit supporting President-elect Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, Trump Vance 2025 Transition, Inc. The controversy reinforces why conservatives should insist on strong privacy protections when advocating their beliefs. 

Trump’s transition team has chosen to raise funds entirely from private donations, sparing taxpayer dollars and avoiding red tape. Predictably, Democrats are exploiting this decision to launch a renewed attack on the president-elect’s supporters. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., is amplifying baseless claims of nefarious influence by Trump donors, while Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., sent a letter to the Biden administration expressing alarm about the Trump transition team’s rejection of past transition practices. 

Importantly, the Trump transition team has agreed to disclose their donors and reject funding from foreign sources. The left remains unsatisfied because transition officials have not offered details of when the disclosures will be made, nor how detailed they will be. Yet, considering the left’s history of weaponizing the government against conservatives, Trump’s instinct to protect his supporters is more than warranted. 

The Democratic obsession with exposing conservative donors is longstanding. In 2021, a Department of Treasury contractor, Charles Littlejohn, leaked the confidential tax returns of Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and other high-profile individuals. Despite the blatant violation of federal privacy law, Littlejohn received a mere five-year prison sentence based on the charges brought against him. The lenient treatment showcased federal prosecutors’ unseriousness in protecting conservatives from leftist radicals.

In 2019, Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, tweeted the names and addresses of individuals in his congressional district who donated to Donald Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign. While campaign donations are already disclosed to the Federal Election Commission, by tweeting Trump supporters’ personal information, Castro placed a target on private individuals merely exercising their First Amendment rights. Some business owners who were listed on the tweet faced harassment and death threats by left-wing activists who were inspired specifically by Castro’s tweet.

Meanwhile, before Jack Smith was assigned as the special prosecutor to lead the witch hunt against Donald Trump, Smith spearheaded efforts to silence conservative grassroots organizations in the lead-up to President Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign. Much like his crusade against Donald Trump, Smith relied on manufactured accusations to subject conservative groups to extrajudicial regulatory scrutiny from the IRS, consequently denying many groups the right to speak on issues of public concern, right before a contentious presidential election.

In his first term, Donald Trump took on the left’s abuse of privacy and fueling of cancel culture. His administration enacted a reform that stopped the IRS from collecting donor lists for many nonprofits without a legitimate tax law purpose. This reform followed years of careless mismanagement of sensitive donor information by the IRS, with numerous leaks that disproportionately exposed conservatives.

Furthermore, in a landmark 2021 U.S. Supreme Court case, Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, all three Supreme Court justices appointed by President Donald Trump ruled in the majority to reaffirm a First Amendment right to support nonprofits without being surveilled by state officials. The loser in that case? California’s attorney general office, which first tried to seize nonprofit donor lists under then-AG Kamala Harris.  

The 2024 election demonstrated the foresight of President Trump’s pro-privacy reforms. When politics becomes as divisive as it is today, the consequences of donor exposure can include professional backlash, job loss, social ostracism, harassment, or even threats of physical harm.

While Trump Vance 2025 Transition, Inc. might ultimately choose to disclose their donors, they would be on firm ground to refuse. Even now, the left’s campaign of harassment of Trump supporters continues. Most recently, Trump cabinet nominees and appointees were victims of dangerous “swatting” attacks. 

For many Americans, donating to like-minded nonprofits is the only way to participate in civic engagement without risking their privacy or livelihoods. This is particularly true for supporters of conservative causes, who often face a disproportionately hostile media and social environment. Donor privacy is not merely a matter of convenience, but a fundamental right that enables free speech and civic engagement. President-elect Donald Trump, who had his life threatened by radicals, understands this better than most. 

Brian Hawkins is the senior director of external affairs at People United for Privacy Foundation.