Enforcement of NJ 'Dark Money' Disclosure Law On Hold While Challenge Proceeds
Americans for Prosperity has demonstrated it has a "reasonable probability of winning on the merits at trial" on its claim that the law is unconstitutional, U.S. District Judge Brian Martinotti said when he granted the injunction Wednesday.
October 02, 2019 at 05:19 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New Jersey Law Journal
A federal judge has ruled that New Jersey may not enforce its new law requiring disclosure of certain "dark money" campaign contributions while a First Amendment challenge to the law proceeds.
Americans for Prosperity, the group that filed suit in June to challenge the law known as S-150, has demonstrated it has a "reasonable probability of winning on the merits at trial" on its claim that the law is unconstitutional, U.S. District Judge Brian Martinotti for the District of New Jersey said when he granted the injunction Wednesday.
Americans for Prosperity met its burden of showing irreparable harm would result if the law were enforced because "the loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury," Martinotti said. And the plaintiff showed a preliminary injunction to be in the public interest because "the enforcement of an unconstitutional law vindicates no public interest," Martinotti said.
In addition, the state failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that the statute withstands scrutiny, the judge said.
The injunction was sought for a measure signed into law by Gov. Phil Murphy on June 17. It imposes disclosure requirements on independent expenditure committees, which are defined as 501(c)(4) or 527 organizations that raise or spend an aggregate of at least $3,000 annually on influencing elections or legislation or providing what the bill calls "political information." The bill defines that term as including any statement made through any medium that reflects the organization's opinions, or that contains facts on any candidate or public question, legislation or regulation.
Americans for Prosperity claims in the suit that the new law wrongly applies the same regulatory standard to issue advocacy as is reserved for election of candidates. The suit claims that S-150′s regulation of communications that influence elections is overly broad and has no provisions to ensure that the speech it regulates has a sufficient nexus to a New Jersey election.
Americans for Prosperity is supported by Charles Koch. Before he died in August, David Koch also backed the organization. The group's suit named as defendants Attorney General Gurbir Grewal and the commissioners of the Election Law Enforcement Commission: Eric Jaso, Stephen Holden and Marguerite Simon.
Recently, two other groups have filed their own suits in the District of New Jersey seeking to have S-150 declared unconstitutional—the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey and the Illinois Opportunity Project, a social welfare group. Their cases have been held in abeyance pending the outcome of the motion for a stay in the present case. But no such bill has been passed to date.
Martinotti noted that Murphy conditionally vetoed a prior version of the bill, expressing reservations that certain provisions "may infringe" rights of free speech and free association. Murphy said that "the bill covers all issue advocacy conducted at any time, regardless of whether the advocacy is connected to an issue before the electorate," according to the judge. As a result, the Governor stated, "It is unclear whether disclosure requirements for communications that are not connected to an election would withstand judicial scrutiny." After the governor sent the bill back to the Senate and recommended the correction of "drafting errors," the Senate sent back a bill that was "practically identical" to the previous version, Martinotti said. The governor signed that bill into law June 10 along with a signing statement calling for passage of a companion measure that would remove advocacy from its parameters. But no such bill has been passed to date, Martinotti said.
Martinotti said he was troubled by the way the bill brings communication of purely factual information into a disclosure and financial reporting scheme that has historically been limited to electioneering communications. He granted the injunction after concluding that the plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits, that the plaintiff would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in favor of the plaintiff and that an injunction is in the public interest.
Derek Shaffer, William Burck and Keith Forst of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan in Washington, D.C., and John Boyle and Kevin Marino of Marino, Tortorella & Boyle in Chatham represented Americans for Prosperity. Deputy Attorney General Stuart Feinblatt represented the state.
"We are very pleased with Judge Martinotti's thorough and well-reasoned decision to enjoin this deeply flawed statute and look forward to succeeding on the merits of our constitutional challenge," Marino said.
Lee Moore, a spokesman for Grewal, said "we are reviewing the decision."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: Simpson Thacher and ACLU Team To Challenge Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
A Reporter and a Mayor: Behind the Scenes During the Eric Adams Indictment News Cycle
Even With New Business Courts, Texas Is a Long Way from Taking Delaware's Corporate Law Mantle
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250