Responding to Free Speech Lawsuits, Judge Strikes Down New Jersey Donor Disclosure Law
Wednesday's orders bar enforcement actions against any independent expenditure committee for noncompliance with the act.
March 13, 2020 at 01:08 PM
3 minute read
New Jersey has been permanently enjoined from enforcing a law enacted to shed light on dark money campaign contributions.
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Brian Martinotti signed orders converting a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the dark money law into a final judgment. The orders were signed in a pair of First Amendment suits, one brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey and the national ACLU, and another by a social welfare organization called Illinois Opportunity Project.
Wednesday's orders bar enforcement actions against any independent expenditure committee for noncompliance with the act. The orders do not prevent legislators or the Election Law Enforcement Commission from enacting and enforcing future legislation on the subject of dark money.
"This court order halts the enforcement of a law that hindered the freedom of assembly, hampered the right to petition government, and compromised privacy rights," ACLU-NJ Legal Director Jeanne LoCicero said in a statement. "All nonprofits should be able to communicate about issues of public concern without fear of being subject to invasive disclosure rules."
"Adopted under the guise of transparency, these laws are designed to allow opponents of advocacy groups to intimidate and harass the organizations' supporters," Patrick Hughes, president of the Liberty Justice Center, a public interest organization that represented the Illinois Opportunity Project, said in a statement. "All Americans should be free to support causes they believe in without an invasion into their privacy through excessive government reporting requirements or retribution from their opponents."
When Martinotti issued the preliminary injunction in October 2019, he said the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their challenge, and that he was troubled by the law's requirement that groups communicating purely factual information could be subjected to a disclosure scheme historically limited to election-related communications.
The New Jersey law required certain groups that raise or spend money for issue advocacy to identify their donors. But the suits said the New Jersey law violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments and unfairly targeted social welfare organizations while exempting labor unions and business groups.
Plaintiffs in the ACLU and Illinois Opportunity Project cases agreed to pay their own legal fees and costs. A third group that went to court to challenge the dark money law, Americans for Prosperity, is preparing to submit a fee application in the case, and no permanent injunction has been issued in that case.
Stephanie Teplin of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler represented the ACLU along with LoCicero.
Daniel Suhr and Brian Kelsey of the Liberty Justice Center represented the Illinois Opportunity Project along with Mark Scirocco of the Law Office of Robert Scirocco in Budd Lake as local counsel. Kevin Marino and John Boyle of Marino, Tortorella & Boyle in Chatham represented Americans for Prosperity.
Stuart Feinblatt and Adam Masef of the Attorney General's Office represented Attorney General Gurbir Grewal and members of the Election Law Enforcement Commission. The Attorney General's Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
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 AllNJ Attorney General's Office Announces Major Shake-Up for Executive Leadership Team
4 minute read'Bewitched by the Technology': $300K to Settle Faulty Facial Recognition
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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