; creating public relations campaigns aimed at mobilizing the judiciary around particular issues; and drafting law review articles, amicus briefs, and other products which tell judges how to decide a given case and provide ready-made arguments for willing judges to adopt. (6) Over the past decade, nonprofit organizations that do not disclose their donors have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to influence the nomination and confirmation process for Federal judges. One organization alone has spent nearly $40,000,000 on advertisements supporting or opposing Supreme Court nominees since 2016. (7) Anonymous money spent on judicial nominations is not subject to any disclosure requirements. Federal election laws only regulate contributions and expenditures relating to electoral politics; thus, expenditures, contributions, and advocacy efforts for Federal judgeships are not covered under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. Without more disclosure, the public has no way of knowing whether the people spending money supporting or opposing judicial nominations have business before the courts. (8) Congress and the American people have a compelling interest in knowing who is funding these campaigns to select and confirm judges to lifetime appointments on the Federal bench. (b) Reporting Section 324 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 ( 52 U.S.C. 30126 ), as amended by section 6011, is amended by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h) and by inserting after subsection (f) the following new subsection: (g) Application to Federal judicial nominations (1) In general For purposes of this section— (A) a disbursement by a covered organization for a Federal judicial nomination communication shall be treated as a campaign-related disbursement