TY 2014 Form 990

(A) Name and Title	(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)	(C) Position (do not check more than one box, unless person is both an officer and a director/trustee)	(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(F) Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations
(1) WILLIAM H MELLOR........................................................................ PRES. & GENERAL COUNSEL	40.00 .......................	X	X			487,731	1,647,717
(2) DAVID B KENNEDY........................................................................ DIRECTOR & CHAIRMAN	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(3) MARY STIEFEL........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(4) JAMES LINTOTT........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(5) ABIGAIL THERNSTROM........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(6) ARTHUR DANTCHIK........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(7) STEPHEN W MODZELEWSKI........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(8) ROBERT GELFOND........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(9) KEN LEVY........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(10) ROBERT LEVY........................................................................ DIRECTOR	1.00 .......................	X				0	0
(11) STEVEN ANDERSON........................................................................ MANAGING VP-CFO/SEC./TREAS.	40.00 .......................		X			197,261	34,657
(12) BETH STEVENS........................................................................ VP FOR DEVELOPMENT	40.00 .......................			X		193,259	32,852
(13) JOHN KRAMER........................................................................ VP FOR COMMUNICATIONS	40.00 .......................			X		269,818	56,417
(14) DEBORAH SIMPSON........................................................................ VP OF STATE OFFICES	40.00 .......................			X		188,310	47,032
(15) DANA BERLINER........................................................................ LITIGATION DIRECTOR	40.00 .......................			X		266,907	43,625
(16) SCOTT BULLOCK........................................................................ SENIOR ATTORNEY	40.00 .......................				X	252,897	41,264
(17) CLARK NEILY........................................................................ SENIOR ATTORNEY	40.00 .......................				X	204,661	36,736

Do not include amounts reported on lines 6b, 7b, 8b, 9b, and 10b of Part VIII.	(A) Total expenses	(B) Program service expenses	(C) Management and general expenses	(D) Fundraising expenses
1	Grants and other assistance to domestic organizations and domestic governments. See Part IV, line 21 ....
2	Grants and other assistance to domestic individuals. See Part IV, line 22 ....
3	Grants and other assistance to foreign organizations, foreign governments, and foreign individuals. See Part IV, lines 15 and 16 ............
4	Benefits paid to or for members ....
5	Compensation of current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees ....	3,557,030	3,053,702	202,908	300,420
6	Compensation not included above, to disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)) and persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B) ....
7	Other salaries and wages ....	7,463,579	6,536,661	615,225	311,693
8	Pension plan accruals and contributions (include section 401(k) and 403(b) employer contributions) ....	519,716	274,854	159,602	85,260
9	Other employee benefits .......	592,856	500,636	53,357	38,863
10	Payroll taxes ...........	580,722	497,316	49,341	34,065
11	Fees for services (non-employees):
a	Management ......
b	Legal .........	262,032	245,830	12,452	3,750
c	Accounting ...........	66,868		65,109	1,759
d	Lobbying ...........	1,562	1,562
e	Professional fundraising services. See Part IV, line 17
f	Investment management fees ......
g	Other (If line 11g amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 11g expenses on Schedule O) ....	581,890	499,639	66,284	15,967
12	Advertising and promotion ....	52,413	51,678	735
13	Office expenses .......	1,026,765	595,326	164,369	267,070
14	Information technology ......	172,219	10,032	162,187
15	Royalties ..
16	Occupancy ...........	1,571,611	1,268,048	189,568	113,995
17	Travel ............	714,060	685,968	16,569	11,523
18	Payments of travel or entertainment expenses for any federal, state, or local public officials ......
19	Conferences, conventions, and meetings ....	365,698	356,441	7,987	1,270
20	Interest ...........	3,816		3,816
21	Payments to affiliates .......
22	Depreciation, depletion, and amortization .....	403,536	334,083	39,677	29,776
23	Insurance ..............	129,884	72,476	55,420	1,988
24	Other expenses. Itemize expenses not covered above (List miscellaneous expenses in line 24e. If line 24e amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 24e expenses on Schedule O.)
a	FILING & COURT FEES	42,784	42,784
b
c
d
e	All other expenses
25	Total functional expenses. Add lines 1 through 24e	18,109,041	15,027,036	1,864,606	1,217,399
26	Joint costs. Complete this line only if the organization reported in column (B) joint costs from a combined educational campaign and fundraising solicitation. Check here if following SOP 98-2 (ASC 958-720).

Part X Balance Sheet Check if Schedule O contains a response or note to any line in this Part X ..............
	1	Cash–non-interest-bearing .............	1,400	1	1,000
2	Savings and temporary cash investments .........	24,339,803	2	25,737,895
3	Pledges and grants receivable, net ...........	3,646,257	3	7,385,729
4	Accounts receivable, net .............	12,097	4	2,683,868
5	Loans and other receivables from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees. Complete Part II of Schedule L ..................
			5
6	Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B), and contributing employers and sponsoring organizations of section 501(c)(9) voluntary employees' beneficiary organizations (see instructions) Complete Part II of Schedule L
			6
7	Notes and loans receivable, net .............		7
8	Inventories for sale or use ..............		8
9	Prepaid expenses and deferred charges ..........	230,055	9	250,224
10a	Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D	10a	3,926,632
b	Less: accumulated depreciation .....	10b	2,639,192	758,646	10c	1,287,440
11	Investments—publicly traded securities ..........	20,156,625	11	29,806,756
12	Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 .....	4,960,861	12	5,761,061
13	Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 .....		13
14	Intangible assets ...............		14
15	Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 ...........	164,723	15	199,780
16	Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 34)......	54,270,467	16	73,113,753
	17	Accounts payable and accrued expenses .........	739,393	17	2,405,167
18	Grants payable .................		18
19	Deferred revenue ................	25,137	19	0
20	Tax-exempt bond liabilities .............		20
21	Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D..		21
22	Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified
	persons. Complete Part II of Schedule L..........		22
23	Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties ..		23
24	Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties ....		24
25	Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17-24). Complete Part X of Schedule D....................	261,312	25	1,565,514
26	Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25.........	1,025,842	26	3,970,681
		Organizations that follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 27 through 29, and lines 33 and 34.
27	Unrestricted net assets ..............	49,103,431	27	60,337,444
28	Temporarily restricted net assets ...........	4,141,194	28	8,705,628
29	Permanently restricted net assets ...........		29	100,000
	Organizations that do not follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 30 through 34.
30	Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds ........		30
31	Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building or equipment fund .....		31
32	Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds		32
33	Total net assets or fund balances ...........	53,244,625	33	69,143,072
34	Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances ........	54,270,467	34	73,113,753

- TIN:

SCHEDULE A
(Form 990 or 990EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Public Charity Status and Public Support

Complete if the organization is a section 501(c)(3) organization or a section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust.
right arrow

Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.
right arrow

Information about Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Part I

Reason for Public Charity Status (All organizations must complete this part.) See instructions.

The organization is not a private foundation because it is: (For lines 1 through 11, check only one box.)

A church, convention of churches, or association of churches described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(i).

A school described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii). (Attach Schedule E.)

A hospital or a cooperative hospital service organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii).

A medical research organization operated in conjunction with a hospital described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii). Enter the hospital's name, city, and state:

An organization operated for the benefit of a college or university owned or operated by a governmental unit described in

section 170(b)(1)(A)(iv). (Complete Part II.)

A federal, state, or local government or governmental unit described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(v).

An organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or from the general public described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

A community trust described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

An organization that normally receives: (1) more than 331/3% of its support from contributions, membership fees, and gross

receipts from activities related to its exempt functions—subject to certain exceptions, and (2) no more than 331/3% of

its support from gross investment income and unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 tax) from businesses

acquired by the organization after June 30, 1975. See section 509(a)(2). (Complete Part III.)

An organization organized and operated exclusively to test for public safety. See section 509(a)(4).

An organization organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of one or more publicly supported organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or section 509(a)(2). See section 509(a)(3). Check the box in lines 11a through 11d that describes the type of supporting organization and complete lines 11e, 11f, and 11g.

Type I. A supporting organization operated, supervised, or controlled by its supported organization(s), typically by giving the supported organization(s) the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the directors or trustees of the supporting organization. You must complete Part IV, Sections A and B.

Type II. A supporting organization supervised or controlled in connection with its supported organization(s), by having control or management of the supporting organization vested in the same persons that control or manage the supported organization(s). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and C.

Type III functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with, and functionally integrated with, its supported organization(s) (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A, D, and E.

Type III non-functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with its supported organization(s) that is not functionally integrated. The organization generally must satisfy a distribution requirement and an attentiveness requirement (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and D, and Part V.

Check this box if the organization received a written determination from the IRS that it is a Type I, Type II, Type III functionally integrated, or Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organization.

Enter the number of supported organizations .............................

Provide the following information about the supported organization(s).

(i)Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	(iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document?		(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)
(i)Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	Yes	No	(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)


Total

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990EZ.

Cat. No. 11285F

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 2

Part II

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(iv) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 5, 7, or 8 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part III. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part III.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") ....	18,305,447	18,582,104	18,598,848	23,917,519	30,397,072	109,800,990
2	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf.......
3	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
4	Total. Add lines 1 through 3	18,305,447	18,582,104	18,598,848	23,917,519	30,397,072	109,800,990
5	The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f)..						24,130,488
6	Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.						85,670,502

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
7	Amounts from line 4..	18,305,447	18,582,104	18,598,848	23,917,519	30,397,072	109,800,990
8	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources...	54,026	85,201	161,654	173,350	330,583	804,814
9	Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on..
10	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.)..
11	Total support Add lines 7 through 10.						110,605,804

Gross receipts from related activities, etc. (see instructions) ..................

5,648,770

First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here........................................ right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2014 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f)) .........

77.460 %

Public support percentage for 2013 Schedule A, Part II, line 14 ...............

75.230 %

16a

33 1/3% support test—2014. If the organization did not check the box on line 13, and line 14 is 33 1/3% or more, check this box
and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ....................... right arrow

33 1/3% support test—2013. If the organization did not check a box on line 13 or 16a, and line 15 is 33 1/3% or more, check this
box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ..................... right arrow

17a

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2014. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, or 16b, and line 14
is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain
in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported
organization ..................................................... right arrow

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2013. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, or 17a, and line
15 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here.
Explain in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly
supported organization ................................................ right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, 17a, or 17b, check this box and see
instructions ..................................................... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 3

Part III

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Section 509(a)(2)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 9 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part II. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part II.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") .
2	Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization's tax-exempt purpose......
3	Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513..
4	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf...
5	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
6	Total. Add lines 1 through 5.
7a	Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons...
b	Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year.
c	Add lines 7a and 7b..
8	Public support (Subtract line 7c from line 6.)

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2010	(b) 2011	(c) 2012	(d) 2013	(e) 2014	(f) Total
9	Amounts from line 6...
10a	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources..
b	Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975.
c	Add lines 10a and 10b.
11	Net income from unrelated business activities not included in line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on.
12	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.) ..
13	Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.)..

First five years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization,
check this box and stop here............................................. right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2014 (line 8, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) .........

Public support percentage from 2013 Schedule A, Part III, line 15 ...............

Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage

Investment income percentage for 2014 (line 10c, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) ......

Investment income percentage from 2013 Schedule A, Part III, line 17 .............

19a

33 1/3% support tests—2014. If the organization did not check the box on line 14, and line 15 is more than 33 1/3%, and line 17 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ....... right arrow

33 1/3% support tests—2013. If the organization did not check a box on line 14 or line 19a, and line 16 is more than 33 1/3% and line 18 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization .... right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 14, 19a, or 19b, check this box and see instructions .... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 4

Part IV

Supporting Organizations

(Complete only if you checked a box on line 11 of Part I. If you checked 11a of Part I, complete Sections A and B. If you checked 11b of Part I, complete Sections A and C. If you checked 11c of Part I, complete Sections A, D, and E. If you checked 11d of Part I, complete Sections A and D, and complete Part V.)

Section A. All Supporting Organizations

Yes

Are all of the organization’s supported organizations listed by name in the organization’s governing documents?
If "No," describe in Part VI how the supported organizations are designated. If designated by class or purpose,
describe the designation. If historic and continuing relationship, explain.

Did the organization have any supported organization that does not have an IRS determination of status under section 509(a)(1) or (2)? If "Yes," explain in Part VI how the organization determined that the supported organization was described in section 509(a)(1) or (2).

Did the organization have a supported organization described in section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6)? If "Yes," answer (b) and (c) below.

Did the organization confirm that each supported organization qualified under section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) and satisfied the public support tests under section 509(a)(2)? If "Yes," describe in Part VI when and how the organization made the determination.

Did the organization ensure that all support to such organizations was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes? If "Yes," explain in Part VI what controls the organization put in place to ensure such use.

Was any supported organization not organized in the United States ("foreign supported organization")? If “Yes” and if you checked 11a or 11b in Part I, answer (b) and (c) below.

Did the organization have ultimate control and discretion in deciding whether to make grants to the foreign supported organization? If “Yes,” describe in Part VI how the organization had such control and discretion despite being controlled or supervised by or in connection with its supported organizations....

Did the organization support any foreign supported organization that does not have an IRS determination under sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a)(1) or (2)? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI what controls the organization used to ensure that all support to the foreign supported organization was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes.

Did the organization add, substitute, or remove any supported organizations during the tax year? If “Yes,” answer (b) and (c) below (if applicable). Also, provide detail in Part VI, including (i) the names and EIN numbers of the supported organizations added, substituted, or removed, (ii) the reasons for each such action, (iii) the authority under the organization's organizing document authorizing such action, and (iv) how the action was accomplished (such as by amendment to the organizing document).

Type I or Type II only. Was any added or substituted supported organization part of a class already designated in the organization's organizing document?

Substitutions only. Was the substitution the result of an event beyond the organization's control?

Did the organization provide support (whether in the form of grants or the provision of services or facilities) to anyone other than (a) its supported organizations; (b) individuals that are part of the charitable class benefited by one or more of its supported organizations; or (c) other supporting organizations that also support or benefit one or more of the filing organization’s supported organizations? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did the organization provide a grant, loan, compensation, or other similar payment to a substantial contributor (defined in IRC 4958(c)(3)(C)), a family member of a substantial contributor, or a 35-percent controlled entity with regard to a substantial contributor? If “Yes,” complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990) .

Did the organization make a loan to a disqualified person (as defined in section 4958) not described in line 7? If “Yes,” complete Part II of Schedule L (Form 990).

Was the organization controlled directly or indirectly at any time during the tax year by one or more disqualified persons as defined in section 4946 (other than foundation managers and organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or (2))? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did one or more disqualified persons (as defined in line 9(a)) hold a controlling interest in any entity in which the supporting organization had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did a disqualified person (as defined in line 9(a)) have an ownership interest in, or derive any personal benefit from, assets in which the supporting organization also had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

10a

Was the organization subject to the excess business holdings rules of IRC 4943 because of IRC 4943(f) (regarding certain Type II supporting organizations, and all Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations)? If “Yes,” answer b below.

10a

Did the organization have any excess business holdings in the tax year? (Use Schedule C, Form 4720, to determine whether the organization had excess business holdings).

10b

Has the organization accepted a gift or contribution from any of the following persons?

A person who directly or indirectly controls, either alone or together with persons described in (b) and (c) below, the governing body of a supported organization?

11a

A family member of a person described in (a) above?

11b

A 35% controlled entity of a person described in (a) or (b) above? If “Yes” to a, b, or c, provide detail in Part VI.

11c

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 5

Part IV

Supporting Organizations (continued)

Section B. Type I Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the directors, trustees, or membership of one or more supported organizations have the power to regularly appoint or elect at least a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees at all times during the tax year? If “No,” describe in Part VI how the supported organization(s) effectively operated, supervised, or controlled the organization’s activities. If the organization had more than one supported organization, describe how the powers to appoint and/or remove directors or trustees were allocated among the supported organizations and what conditions or restrictions, if any, applied to such powers during the tax year.

Did the organization operate for the benefit of any supported organization other than the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised, or controlled the supporting organization? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI how providing such benefit carried out the purposes of the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised or controlled the supporting organization.

Section C. Type II Supporting Organizations

Yes

Were a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees during the tax year also a majority of the directors or trustees of each of the organization’s supported organization(s)? If “No,” describe in Part VI how control or management of the supporting organization was vested in the same persons that controlled or managed the supported organization(s).

Section D. All Type III Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the organization provide to each of its supported organizations, by the last day of the fifth month of the organization’s tax year, (1) a written notice describing the type and amount of support provided during the prior tax year, (2) a copy of the Form 990 that was most recently filed as of the date of notification, and (3) copies of the organization’s governing documents in effect on the date of notification, to the extent not previously provided?

Were any of the organization’s officers, directors, or trustees either (i) appointed or elected by the supported organization(s) or (ii) serving on the governing body of a supported organization? If "No," explain in Part VI how the organization maintained a close and continuous working relationship with the supported organization(s).

By reason of the relationship described in (2), did the organization’s supported organizations have a significant voice in the organization’s investment policies and in directing the use of the organization’s income or assets at all times during the tax year? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role the organization’s supported organizations played in this regard.

Section E. Type III Functionally-Integrated Supporting Organizations

Check the box next to the method that the organization used to satisfy the Integral Part Test during the year (see instructions):

The organization satisfied the Activities Test. Complete line 2 below.

The organization is the parent of each of its supported organizations. Complete line 3 below.

The organization supported a governmental entity. Describe in Part VI how you supported a government entity (see instructions)

Activities Test. Answer (a) and (b) below.

Yes

Did substantially all of the organization’s activities during the tax year directly further the exempt purposes of the supported organization(s) to which the organization was responsive? If "Yes," then in Part VI identify those supported organizations and explain how these activities directly furthered their exempt purposes, how the organization was responsive to those supported organizations, and how the organization determined that these activities constituted substantially all of its activities.

Did the activities described in (a) constitute activities that, but for the organization’s involvement, one or more of the organization’s supported organization(s) would have been engaged in? If "Yes," explain in Part VI the reasons for the organization’s position that its supported organization(s) would have engaged in these activities but for the organization’s involvement.

Parent of Supported Organizations. Answer (a) and (b) below.

Did the organization have the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the officers, directors, or trustees of each of the supported organizations? Provide details in Part VI.

Did the organization exercise a substantial degree of direction over the policies, programs and activities of each of its supported organizations? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role played by the organization in this regard.

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 6

Part V – Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations

1. Check here if the organization satisfied the Integral Part Test as a qualifying trust on Nov. 20, 1970. See instructions. All other Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations must complete Sections A through E.

	Section A - Adjusted Net Income		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Net short-term capital gain	1
2	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	2
3	Other gross income (see instructions)	3
4	Add lines 1 through 3	4
5	Depreciation and depletion	5
6	Portion of operating expenses paid or incurred for production or collection of gross income or for management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income (see instructions)	6
7	Other expenses (see instructions)	7
8	Adjusted Net Income (subtract lines 5, 6 and 7 from line 4)	8

	Section B - Minimum Asset Amount		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Aggregate fair market value of all non-exempt-use assets (see instructions for short tax year or assets held for part of year):	1
a	Average monthly value of securities	1a
b	Average monthly cash balances	1b
c	Fair market value of other non-exempt-use assets	1c
d	Total (add lines 1a, 1b, and 1c)	1d
e	Discount claimed for blockage or other factors (explain in detail in Part VI):
2	Acquisition indebtedness applicable to non-exempt use assets	2
3	Subtract line 2 from line 1d	3
4	Cash deemed held for exempt use. Enter 1-1/2% of line 3 (for greater amount, see instructions).	4
5	Net value of non-exempt-use assets (subtract line 4 from line 3)	5
6	Multiply line 5 by .035	6
7	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	7
8	Minimum Asset Amount (add line 7 to line 6)	8

	Section C - Distributable Amount		Current Year
1	Adjusted net income for prior year (from Section A, line 8, Column A)	1
2	Enter 85% of line 1	2
3	Minimum asset amount for prior year (from Section B, line 8, Column A)	3
4	Enter greater of line 2 or line 3	4
5	Income tax imposed in prior year	5
6	Distributable Amount. Subtract line 5 from line 4, unless subject to emergency temporary reduction (see instructions)	6
7	Check here if the current year is the organization's first as a non-functionally-integrated Type III supporting organization (see instructions)

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 7

Section D - Distributions		Current Year
1 Amounts paid to supported organizations to accomplish exempt purposes
2 Amounts paid to perform activity that directly furthers exempt purposes of supported organizations, in excess of income from activity
3 Administrative expenses paid to accomplish exempt purposes of supported organizations
4 Amounts paid to acquire exempt-use assets
5 Qualified set-aside amounts (prior IRS approval required)
6 Other distributions (describe in Part VI). See instructions
7Total annual distributions. Add lines 1 through 6.
8 Distributions to attentive supported organizations to which the organization is responsive (provide details in Part VI). See instructions
9 Distributable amount for 2014 from Section C, line 6
10 Line 8 amount divided by Line 9 amount

Section E - Distribution Allocations (see instructions)		(i) Excess Distributions	(ii) Underdistributions Pre-2014	(iii) Distributable Amount for 2014
1 Distributable amount for 2014 from Section C, line 6
2 Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2014 (reasonable cause required--see instructions)
3 Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2014:
a From 2009.......X
b From 2010.......X
c From 2011.......X
d From 2012.......X
e From 2013.......
fTotal of lines 3a through e
g Applied to underdistributions of prior years
h Applied to 2014 distributable amount
i Carryover from 2009 not applied (see instructions)
j Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from 3f.
4Distributions for 2014 from Section D, line 7:
$
a Applied to underdistributions of prior years
b Applied to 2014 distributable amount
c Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from 4.
5 Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2014, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2 (if amount greater than zero, see instructions)
6 Remaining underdistributions for 2014. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1 (if amount greater than zero, see instructions)
7 Excess distributions carryover to 2015. Add lines 3j and 4c.
8 Breakdown of line 7:
a From 2010.......X
b From 2011.......X
c From 2012.......X
d From 2013.......
e From 2014.......

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) (2014)

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 8

Part VI

Supplemental Information. Provide the explanations required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; Part III, line 12; Part IV, Section A, lines 1, 2, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c, 5a, 6, 9a, 9b, 9c, 11a, 11b, and 11c; Part IV, Section B, lines 1 and 2; Part IV, Section C, line 1; Part IV, Section D, lines 2 and 3; Part IV, Section E, lines 1c, 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b; Part V, line 1; Part V, Section B, line 1e; Part V Section D, lines 5, 6, and 8; and Part V, Section E, lines 2, 5, and 6. Also complete this part for any additional information. (See instructions).

Facts And Circumstances Test

Return Reference	Explanation

Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

Schedule B
(Form 990, 990-EZ,
or 990-PF)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Schedule of Contributors

Attach to Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF.

Information about Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Name of the organization

INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Organization type (check one):

Filers of:

Section:

Form 990 or 990-EZ

501(c)( ) (enter number) organization

4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust not treated as a private foundation

527 political organization

Form 990-PF

501(c)(3) exempt private foundation

4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust treated as a private foundation

501(c)(3) taxable private foundation

Check if your organization is covered by the General Rule or a Special Rule.
Note. Only a section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) organization can check boxes for both the General Rule and a Special Rule. See instructions.

General Rule

For an organization filing Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF that received, during the year, contributions totaling $5,000 or more (in money or
property) from any one contributor. Complete Parts I and II. See instructions for determining a contributor's total contributions.

Special Rules

For an organization described in section 501(c)(3) filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that met the 33¹/3% support test of the regulations
under sections 509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi), that checked Schedule A (Form 990 or 990-EZ), Part II, line 13, 16a, or 16b, and that received from any one contributor, during the year, total contributions of the greater of (1) $5,000 or (2) 2% of the amount on (i) Form 990, Part VIII, line 1h, or (ii) Form 990-EZ, line 1. Complete Parts I and II.

For an organization described in section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that received from any one contributor,
during the year, total contributions of more than $1,000 exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. Complete Parts I, II, and III.

For an organization described in section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) filing Form 990 or 990-EZ that received from any one contributor,
during the year, contributions exclusively for religious, charitable, etc., purposes, but no such contributions totaled more than $1,000. If this box is checked, enter here the total contributions that were received during the year for an exclusively religious, charitable, etc., purpose. Do not complete any of the parts unless the General Rule applies to this organization because it received nonexclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions totaling $5,000 or more during the year ......... Arrow Bullet

Caution. An organization that is not covered by the General Rule and/or the Special Rules does not file Schedule B (Form 990,
990-EZ, or 990-PF), but it must answer “No” on Part IV, line 2, of its Form 990; or check the box on line H of its
Form 990-EZ or on its Form 990PF, Part I, line 2, to certify that it does not meet the filing requirements of Schedule B (Form 990,
990-EZ, or 990-PF).

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions
for Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF.

Cat. No. 30613XSchedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2014)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2014)

Page 2

Name of organization INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Part I	Contributors (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part I if additional space is needed.
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
RESTRICTED	,	$RESTRICTED	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2014)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2014)

Page 3

Name of organization INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Part II	Noncash Property (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part II if additional space is needed.
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (see instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2014)

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2014)

Page 4

Name of organization
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Part III

Exclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions to organizations described in section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10)
that total more than $1,000 for the year from any one contributor. Complete columns (a) through (e) and the following line entry. For organizations completing Part III, enter the total of exclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions of $1,000 or less for the year. (Enter this information once. See instructions.) Arrow Bullet

$
Use duplicate copies of Part III if additional space is needed.

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

(a) No.
from
Part I

(b) Purpose of gift

(d) Description of how gift is held

(e) Transfer of gift
Transferee's name, address, and ZIP 4	Relationship of transferor to transferee

Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF) (2014)

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE C
(Form 990 or 990-EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Political Campaign and Lobbying Activities

For Organizations Exempt From Income Tax Under section 501(c) and section 527
SchCMd Bullet

Complete if the organization is described below. SchCMd Bullet

Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.
SchCMd Bullet

Information about Schedule C (Form 990 or 990-EZ) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public
Inspection

If the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, Line 3, or Form 990-EZ, Part V, line 46 (Political Campaign Activities), then
Round Bullet

Section 501(c)(3) organizations: Complete Parts I-A and B. Do not complete Part I-C.
Round Bullet

Section 501(c) (other than section 501(c)(3)) organizations: Complete Parts I-A and C below. Do not complete Part I-B.
Round Bullet

Section 527 organizations: Complete Part I-A only.
If the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, Line 4, or Form 990-EZ, Part VI, line 47 (Lobbying Activities), then
Round Bullet

Section 501(c)(3) organizations that have filed Form 5768 (election under section 501(h)): Complete Part II-A. Do not complete Part II-B.
Round Bullet

Section 501(c)(3) organizations that have NOT filed Form 5768 (election under section 501(h)): Complete Part II-B. Do not complete Part II-A.
If the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, Line 5 (Proxy Tax) (see separate instructions) or Form 990-EZ, Part V, line 35c (Proxy Tax) (see separate instructions), then
Round Bullet

Section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) organizations: Complete Part III.

Name of the organization

INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Part I-A

Complete if the organization is exempt under section 501(c) or is a section 527 organization.

Provide a description of the organization’s direct and indirect political campaign activities in Part IV.

Political expenditures .................................... SchCMd Bullet

Volunteer hours ........................................

Part I-B

Complete if the organization is exempt under section 501(c)(3).

Enter the amount of any excise tax incurred by the organization under section 4955 ......... SchCMd Bullet

Enter the amount of any excise tax incurred by organization managers under section 4955 ...... SchCMd Bullet

If the organization incurred a section 4955 tax, did it file Form 4720 for this year? ..............

Yes No

Was a correction made? .........................................

Yes No

If "Yes," describe in Part IV.

Part I-C

Complete if the organization is exempt under section 501(c), except section 501(c)(3).

Enter the amount directly expended by the filing organization for section 527 exempt function activities SchCMd Bullet

Enter the amount of the filing organization's funds contributed to other organizations for section 527 exempt function activities ................................... SchCMd Bullet

Total exempt function expenditures. Add lines 1 and 2. Enter here and on Form 1120-POL, line 17b.. SchCMd Bullet

Did the filing organization file Form 1120-POL for this year? ..........................

Yes No

Enter the names, addresses and employer identification number (EIN) of all section 527 political organizations to which the filing
organization made payments. For each organization listed, enter the amount paid from the filing organization’s funds. Also enter the amount of political contributions received that were promptly and directly delivered to a separate political organization, such as a separate segregated fund or a political action committee (PAC). If additional space is needed, provide information in Part IV.

(a) Name	(b) Address	(c) EIN	(d) Amount paid from filing organization's funds. If none, enter -0-.	(e) Amount of political contributions received and promptly and directly delivered to a separate political organization. If none, enter -0-.

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.

Cat. No. 50084S

Schedule C (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 2

Part II-A

Complete if the organization is exempt under section 501(c)(3) and filed Form 5768 (election under section 501(h)).

A Check SchCMd Bullet

if the filing organization belongs to an affiliated group (and list in Part IV each affiliated group member's name, address, EIN, expenses, and share of excess lobbying expenditures).
B Check SchCMd Bullet

if the filing organization checked box A and "limited control" provisions apply.

Limits on Lobbying Expenditures (The term "expenditures" means amounts paid or incurred.)		(a) Filing organization's totals	(b) Affiliated group totals
1a	Total lobbying expenditures to influence public opinion (grass roots lobbying) ......	14,313
b	Total lobbying expenditures to influence a legislative body (direct lobbying) .......	98,506
c	Total lobbying expenditures (add lines 1a and 1b) ...................	112,819
d	Other exempt purpose expenditures ........................	17,996,222
e	Total exempt purpose expenditures (add lines 1c and 1d) ...............	18,109,041
f	Lobbying nontaxable amount. Enter the amount from the following table in both columns.	1,000,000
	If the amount on line 1e, column (a) or (b) is:The lobbying nontaxable amount is:
	Not over $500,00020% of the amount on line 1e.
	Over $500,000 but not over $1,000,000$100,000 plus 15% of the excess over $500,000.
	Over $1,000,000 but not over $1,500,000$175,000 plus 10% of the excess over $1,000,000.
	Over $1,500,000 but not over $17,000,000$225,000 plus 5% of the excess over $1,500,000.
	Over $17,000,000$1,000,000.

g	Grassroots nontaxable amount (enter 25% of line 1f) .................	250,000
h	Subtract line 1g from line 1a. If zero or less, enter -0-. ................	0
i	Subtract line 1f from line 1c. If zero or less, enter -0-. ................	0
j	If there is an amount other than zero on either line 1h or line 1i, did the organization file Form 4720 reporting section 4911 tax for this year? ......................................		Yes No

4-Year Averaging Period Under section 501(h) (Some organizations that made a section 501(h) election do not have to complete all of the five columns below. See the separate instructions for lines 2a through 2f.)
Lobbying Expenditures During 4-Year Averaging Period
	Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)	(a) 2011	(b) 2012	(c) 2013	(d) 2014	(e) Total

2a	Lobbying nontaxable amount	779,127	790,605	854,416	1,000,000	3,424,148

b	Lobbying ceiling amount (150% of line 2a, column(e))					5,136,222

c	Total lobbying expenditures	32,430	59,017	38,717	112,819	242,983

d	Grassroots nontaxable amount	194,782	197,651	213,604	250,000	856,037

e	Grassroots ceiling amount (150% of line 2d, column (e))					1,284,056

f	Grassroots lobbying expenditures	12,261	15,644	5,383	14,313	47,601

Schedule C (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Page 3

Part II-B

Complete if the organization is exempt under section 501(c)(3) and has NOT filed Form 5768 (election under section 501(h)).

For each "Yes" response to lines 1a through 1i below, provide in Part IV a detailed description of the lobbying activity.

(a)

Yes

(b)

Amount

During the year, did the filing organization attempt to influence foreign, national, state or local legislation, including any attempt to influence public opinion on a legislative matter or referendum, through the use of:

Volunteers? .........................................

Paid staff or management (include compensation in expenses reported on lines 1c through 1i)? ....

Media advertisements? ....................................

Mailings to members, legislators, or the public? .........................

Publications, or published or broadcast statements? .......................

Grants to other organizations for lobbying purposes? .......................

Direct contact with legislators, their staffs, government officials, or a legislative body? ........

Rallies, demonstrations, seminars, conventions, speeches, lectures, or any similar means? ......

Other activities? ..........................

Total. Add lines 1c through 1i ...............................

Did the activities in line 1 cause the organization to be not described in section 501(c)(3)? .....

If "Yes," enter the amount of any tax incurred under section 4912 .................

If "Yes," enter the amount of any tax incurred by organization managers under section 4912 .....

If the filing organization incurred a section 4912 tax, did it file Form 4720 for this year? .......

Part III-A

Complete if the organization is exempt under section 501(c)(4), section 501(c)(5), or section 501(c)(6).

Yes

Were substantially all (90% or more) dues received nondeductible by members? ................

Did the organization make only in-house lobbying expenditures of $2,000 or less? ................

Did the organization agree to carry over lobbying and political expenditures from the prior year? ..........

Part III-B

Complete if the organization is exempt under section 501(c)(4), section 501(c)(5), or section 501(c)(6) and if either (a) BOTH Part III-A, lines 1 and 2, are answered "No" OR (b) Part III-A, line 3, is answered “Yes."

Dues, assessments and similar amounts from members .....................

Section 162(e) nondeductible lobbying and political expenditures (do not include amounts of political
expenses for which the section 527(f) tax was paid).

Current year .........................................

Carryover from last year ....................................

Total ............................................

Aggregate amount reported in section 6033(e)(1)(A) notices of nondeductible section 162(e) dues .

If notices were sent and the amount on line 2c exceeds the amount on line 3, what portion of the excess does the organization agree to carryover to the reasonable estimate of nondeductible lobbying and political expenditure next year? ................................

Taxable amount of lobbying and political expenditures (see instructions) ..............

Part IV

Supplemental Information

Provide the descriptions required for Part l-A, line 1; Part l-B, line 4; Part l-C, line 5; Part II-A (affiliated group list); Part II-A, lines 1 and 2 (see instructions), and Part ll-B, line 1. Also, complete this part for any additional information.

Return Reference	Explanation

Schedule C (Form 990 or 990EZ) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE D
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Financial Statements

Complete if the organization answered "Yes," to Form 990,
Part IV, line 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11a, 11b, 11c, 11d, 11e, 11f, 12a, or 12b.
SchDMd Bullet

Attach to Form 990.
Information about Schedule D (Form 990) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization

INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Part I

Organizations Maintaining Donor Advised Funds or Other Similar Funds or Accounts. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 6.

		(a) Donor advised funds	(b) Funds and other accounts
1	Total number at end of year .........
2	Aggregate value of contributions to (during year)
3	Aggregate value of grants from (during year)
4	Aggregate value at end of year ........

Did the organization inform all donors and donor advisors in writing that the assets held in donor advised
funds are the organization's property, subject to the organization's exclusive legal control? ............

Yes No

Did the organization inform all grantees, donors, and donor advisors in writing that grant funds can be
used only for charitable purposes and not for the benefit of the donor or donor advisor, or for any other purpose conferring impermissible private benefit? ...................................

Yes No

Part II

Conservation Easements. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 7.

Purpose(s) of conservation easements held by the organization (check all that apply).

Preservation of land for public use (e.g., recreation or education) Preservation of an historically important land area

Protection of natural habitat Preservation of a certified historic structure

Preservation of open space

Complete lines 2a through 2d if the organization held a qualified conservation contribution in the form of a conservation easement on the last day of the tax year.


a	Total number of conservation easements .......................	2a
b	Total acreage restricted by conservation easements ..................	2b
c	Number of conservation easements on a certified historic structure included in (a) .....	2c
d	Number of conservation easements included in (c) acquired after 8/17/06, and not on a historic structure listed in the National Register ....................	2d

Number of conservation easements modified, transferred, released, extinguished, or terminated by the organization during
the tax year SchDMd Bullet

Number of states where property subject to conservation easement is located SchDMd Bullet

Does the organization have a written policy regarding the periodic monitoring, inspection, handling of violations, and
enforcement of the conservation easements it holds? .............................

Yes No

Staff and volunteer hours devoted to monitoring, inspecting, and enforcing conservation easements during the year
SchDMd Bullet

Amount of expenses incurred in monitoring, inspecting, and enforcing conservation easements during the year
SchDMd Bullet

Does each conservation easement reported on line 2(d) above satisfy the requirements of section 170(h)(4)(B)(i) and section 170(h)(4)(B)(ii)? .......................................

Yes No

In Part XIII, describe how the organization reports conservation easements in its revenue and expense statement, and
balance sheet, and include, if applicable, the text of the footnote to the organization’s financial statements that describes
the organization’s accounting for conservation easements.

Part III

Organizations Maintaining Collections of Art, Historical Treasures, or Other Similar Assets.
Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 8.

If the organization elected, as permitted under SFAS 116 (ASC 958), not to report in its revenue statement and balance sheet works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets held for public exhibition, education, or research in furtherance of public service, provide, in Part XIII, the text of the footnote to its financial statements that describes these items.

If the organization elected, as permitted under SFAS 116 (ASC 958), to report in its revenue statement and balance sheet works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets held for public exhibition, education, or research in furtherance of public service, provide the following amounts relating to these items:

(i)

Revenue included in Form 990, Part VIII, line 1 ........................ SchDMd Bullet

(ii)

Assets included in Form 990, Part X .............................. SchDMd Bullet

If the organization received or held works of art, historical treasures, or other similar assets for financial gain, provide the
following amounts required to be reported under SFAS 116 (ASC 958) relating to these items:

Revenue included in Form 990, Part VIII, line 1 .......................... SchDMd Bullet

Assets included in Form 990, Part X ............................... SchDMd Bullet

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.

Cat. No. 52283D

Schedule D (Form 990) 2014

Page 2

Part III

Organizations Maintaining Collections of Art, Historical Treasures, or Other Similar Assets (continued)

Using the organization’s acquisition, accession, and other records, check any of the following that are a significant use of its collection items (check all that apply):

Public exhibition

Loan or exchange programs

Scholarly research

Other

Preservation for future generations

Provide a description of the organization’s collections and explain how they further the organization’s exempt purpose in
Part XIII.

During the year, did the organization solicit or receive donations of art, historical treasures or other similar
assets to be sold to raise funds rather than to be maintained as part of the organization’s collection?........

Yes No

Part IV

Escrow and Custodial Arrangements. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990,
Part IV, line 9, or reported an amount on Form 990, Part X, line 21.

Is the organization an agent, trustee, custodian or other intermediary for contributions or other assets not
included on Form 990, Part X? ....................................

Yes No

If "Yes," explain the arrangement in Part XIII and complete the following table:


c	Beginning balance .................................	1c
d	Additions during the year ..............................	1d
e	Distributions during the year .............................	1e
f	Ending balance ...................................	1f

Did the organization include an amount on Form 990, Part X, line 21, for escrow or custodial account liability?

Yes No

If "Yes," explain the arrangement in Part XIII. Check here if the explanation has been provided in Part XIII .......

Part V

Endowment Funds. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 10.

		(a)Current year
1a	Beginning of year balance ....
b	Contributions ........	100,000
c	Net investment earnings, gains, and losses	-583
d	Grants or scholarships .....
e	Other expenditures for facilities and programs ........
f	Administrative expenses ....
g	End of year balance ......	99,417

Provide the estimated percentage of the current year end balance (line 1g, column (a)) held as:

Board designated or quasi-endowment SchDMd Bullet

Permanent endowment SchDMd Bullet

100.000 %

Temporarily restricted endowment SchDMd Bullet

The percentages in lines 2a, 2b, and 2c should equal 100%.

Are there endowment funds not in the possession of the organization that are held and administered for the
organization by:

Yes

(i) unrelated organizations ........................

3a(i)

Yes

(ii) related organizations ........................

3a(ii)

If "Yes" to 3a(ii), are the related organizations listed as required on Schedule R? .........

Describe in Part XIII the intended uses of the organization's endowment funds.

Part VI

Land, Buildings, and Equipment. Complete if the organization answered 'Yes' to Form 990, Part IV, line 11a. See Form 990, Part X, line 10.

Description of property		(b)Cost or other basis (other)	(c) Accumulated depreciation	(d) Book value
1a	Land .................
b	Buildings ................
c	Leasehold improvements ............	1,867,493	1,234,518	632,975
d	Equipment ................	2,059,139	1,404,674	654,465
e	Other .................
Total. Add lines 1a through 1e. (Column (d) must equal Form 990, Part X, column (B), line 10(c).).......				1,287,440

Schedule D (Form 990) 2014

Page 3

Part VII

InvestmentsOther Securities. Complete if the organization answered 'Yes' to Form 990, Part IV, line 11b. See Form 990, Part X, line 12.

(a) Description of security or category (including name of security)	(b)Book value	(c) Method of valuation: Cost or end-of-year market value
(1)Financial derivatives
(2)Closely-held equity interests
(3)Other (A) HEDGE FUND	5,761,061	F








Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col. (B) line 12.)	5,761,061

Part VIII

InvestmentsProgram Related. Complete if the organization answered 'Yes' to Form 990, Part IV, line 11c. See Form 990, Part X, line 13.

(a) Description of investment		(b) Book value	(c) Method of valuation: Cost or end-of-year market value









Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col.(B) line 13.)

Part IX

Other Assets. Complete if the organization answered 'Yes' to Form 990, Part IV, line 11d. See Form 990, Part X, line 15.

(a) Description				(b) Book value









Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col.(B) line 15.)...........

Part X

Other Liabilities. Complete if the organization answered 'Yes' to Form 990, Part IV, line 11e or 11f. See Form 990, Part X, line 25.

1.(a) Description of liability		(b) Book value
Federal income taxes
DEFERRED RENT		1,360,772
CAPITAL LEASE LIABILITY		36,334
GIFT ANNUITY		168,408






Total. (Column (b) must equal Form 990, Part X, col.(B) line 25.)		1,565,514
2. Liability for uncertain tax positions. In Part XIII, provide the text of the footnote to the organization's financial statements that reports the organization's liability for uncertain tax positions under FIN 48 (ASC 740). Check here if the text of the footnote has been provided in Part XIII

Schedule D (Form 990) 2014

Page 4

Part XI Reconciliation of Revenue per Audited Financial Statements With Revenue per Return Complete if the organization answered 'Yes' to Form 990, Part IV, line 12a.
1	Total revenue, gains, and other support per audited financial statements .......			1	34,117,679
2	Amounts included on line 1 but not on Form 990, Part VIII, line 12:
a	Net unrealized gains (losses) on investments ....	2a	-116,435
b	Donated services and use of facilities .........	2b	110,191
c	Recoveries of prior year grants ...........	2c
d	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ............	2d
e	Add lines 2a through 2d .....................			2e	-6,244
3	Subtract line 2e from line 1.....................			3	34,123,923
4	Amounts included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 12, but not on line 1:
a	Investment expenses not included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 7b .	4a
b	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ...........	4b
c	Add lines 4a and 4b.......................			4c	0
5	Total revenue. Add lines 3 and 4c. (This must equal Form 990, Part I, line 12.) ......			5	34,123,923

Part XII Reconciliation of Expenses per Audited Financial Statements With Expenses per Return. Complete if the organization answered 'Yes' to Form 990, Part IV, line 12a.
1	Total expenses and losses per audited financial statements ...........			1	18,219,232
2	Amounts included on line 1 but not on Form 990, Part IX, line 25:
a	Donated services and use of facilities ..........	2a	110,191
b	Prior year adjustments ..............	2b
c	Other losses ................	2c
d	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ............	2d
e	Add lines 2a through 2d......................			2e	110,191
3	Subtract line 2e from line 1.....................			3	18,109,041
4	Amounts included on Form 990, Part IX, line 25, but not on line 1:
a	Investment expenses not included on Form 990, Part VIII, line 7b ..	4a
b	Other (Describe in Part XIII.) ............	4b
c	Add lines 4a and 4b.......................			4c	0
5	Total expenses. Add lines 3 and 4c. (This must equal Form 990, Part I, line 18.) ......			5	18,109,041

Part XIII

Supplemental Information

Provide the descriptions required for Part II, lines 3, 5, and 9; Part III, lines 1a and 4; Part lV, lines 1b and 2b;
Part V, line 4; Part X, line 2; Part XI, lines 2d and 4b; and Part XII, lines 2d and 4b. Also complete this part to provide any additional information.

Return Reference

Explanation

PART V, LINE 4:

ENDOWMENT FUNDS ARE MAINTAINED TO PROVIDE A PERMANENT SOURCE OF INCOME TO SUPPORT THE INSTITUTE'S OVERALL MISSION. ENDOWMENT ASSETS ARE HELD IN PERPETUITY AS DONOR-RESTRICTED GIFTS, WHILE INCOME GENERATED BY THE ENDOWMENTS ARE UTILIZED BY THE INSTITUTE FOR ITS GENERAL CHARITABLE PURPOSE.

PART X, LINE 2:

THE INSTITUTE IS RECOGNIZED AS TAX-EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE. HOWEVER, INCOME FROM CERTAIN ACTIVITIES NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE INSTITUTE'S TAX-EXEMPT PURPOSE IS SUBJECT TO TAXATION AS UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME. THERE WAS NO UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME FOR THE YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 AND 2014. TAX YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2012 THROUGH 2014 REMAIN OPEN TO EXAMINATION BY THE TAXING JURISDICTIONS TO WHICH THE INSTITUTE IS SUBJECT, AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN EXTENDED BEYOND THE APPLICABLE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS; HOWEVER, THE INSTITUTE BELIEVES THERE ARE NO MATTERS THAT WOULD REQUIRE RECOGNITION IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OR THAT MAY HAVE ANY EFFECT ON ITS TAX-EXEMPT STATUS.

Schedule D (Form 990) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE F(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Statement of Activities Outside the United States

Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990,Part IV, line 14b, 15, or 16. Right pointing arrow large image

Attach to Form 990. Right pointing arrow large image

Information about Schedule F (Form 990) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Part I

General Information on Activities Outside the United States. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 14b.

For grantmakers. Does the organization maintain records to substantiate the amount of its grants

and other assistance, the grantees’ eligibility for the grants or assistance, and the selection criteria

used to award the grants or assistance? ...........................

Yes

For grantmakers. Describe in Part V the organization’s procedures for monitoring the use of its grants and other assistance outside the United States.

Activites per Region. (The following Part I, line 3 table can be duplicated if additional space is needed.)

(a) Region		(b) Number of offices in the region	(c) Number of employees, agents, and independent contractors in region	(d) Activities conducted in region (by type) (e.g., fundraising, program services, investments, grants to recipients located in the region)	(f) Total expenditures for and investments in region
	CAYMAN ISLANDS			INVESTMENTS	5,761,061
















3a	Sub-total .....	0	0		5,761,061
b	Total from continuation sheets to Part I ...	0	0		0
c	Totals (add lines 3a and 3b)	0	0		5,761,061

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.Cat. No. 50082W Schedule F (Form 990) 2014

Schedule F (Form 990) 2014

Page 2

Part II

Grants and Other Assistance to Organizations or Entities Outside the United States. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 15, for any recipient who received more than $5,000. Part II can be duplicated if additional space is needed.

1 (a) Name of organization		(b) IRS code section and EIN (if applicable)	(a)(c) Region	(b)(d) Purpose of grant	(e) Amount of cash grant	(f) Manner of cash disbursement	(g) Amount of non-cash assistance	(h) Description of non-cash assistance	(i) Method of valuation (book, FMV, appraisal, other)

Enter total number of recipient organizations listed above that are recognized as charities by the foreign country, recognized as tax-exempt by the IRS, or for which the grantee or counsel has provided a section 501(c)(3) equivalency letter .... MediumBullet

Enter total number of other organizations or entities ....................... MediumBullet

Schedule F (Form 990) 2014

Schedule F (Form 990) 2014Page 3

Part III

Grants and Other Assistance to Individuals Outside the United States. Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 16.

Part III can be duplicated if additional space is needed.

(a) Type of grant or assistance		(b) Region	(c) Number of recipients	(d) Amount of cash grant	(e) Manner of cash disbursement	(f) Amount of non-cash assistance	(g) Description of non-cash assistance	(h) Method of valuation (book, FMV, appraisal, other)

Schedule F (Form 990) 2014

Page 4

Part IV

Foreign Forms

Schedule F (Form 990) 2014

Page 5

Part V

Supplemental Information
Provide the information required by Part I, line 2 (monitoring of funds); Part I, line 3, column (f) (accounting method; amounts of investments vs. expenditures per region); Part II, line 1 (accounting method); Part III (accounting method); and Part III, column (c) (estimated number of recipients), as applicable. Also complete this part to provide any additional information (see instructions).

ReturnReference	Explanation

Schedule F (Form 990) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

Schedule J
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Compensation Information

For certain Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest
Compensated Employees
SchJMediumBullet

Complete if the organization answered "Yes" to Form 990, Part IV, line 23.
SchJMediumBullet

Attach to Form 990.
SchJMediumBullet

Information about Schedule J (Form 990) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization

INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Part I

Questions Regarding Compensation

Yes

Check the appropiate box(es) if the organization provided any of the following to or for a person listed in Form
990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a. Complete Part III to provide any relevant information regarding these items.

First-class or charter travel Housing allowance or residence for personal use

Travel for companions Payments for business use of personal residence

Tax idemnification and gross-up payments Health or social club dues or initiation fees

Discretionary spending account Personal services (e.g., maid, chauffeur, chef)

If any of the boxes in line 1a are checked, did the organization follow a written policy regarding payment or reimbursement or provision of all of the expenses described above? If "No," complete Part III to explain....

Did the organization require substantiation prior to reimbursing or allowing expenses incurred by all
directors, trustees, officers, including the CEO/Executive Director, regarding the items checked in line 1a? ..

Indicate which, if any, of the following the filing organization used to establish the compensation of the
organization's CEO/Executive Director. Check all that apply. Do not check any boxes for methods
used by a related organization to establish compensation of the CEO/Executive Director, but explain in Part III.

Compensation committee Written employment contract

Independent compensation consultant Compensation survey or study

Form 990 of other organizations Approval by the board or compensation committee

During the year, did any person listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a with respect to the filing organization or a related organization:

Receive a severance payment or change-of-control payment? ................

Participate in, or receive payment from, a supplemental nonqualified retirement plan? .........

Yes

Participate in, or receive payment from, an equity-based compensation arrangement? .........

If "Yes" to any of lines 4a-c, list the persons and provide the applicable amounts for each item in Part III.

Only 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and 501(c)(29) organizations must complete lines 5-9.

For persons listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, did the organization pay or accrue any
compensation contingent on the revenues of:

The organization? ...........................

Any related organization? .........................

If "Yes," to line 5a or 5b, describe in Part III.

For persons listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, did the organization pay or accrue any
compensation contingent on the net earnings of:

The organization? ...........................

Any related organization? .........................

If "Yes," to line 6a or 6b, describe in Part III.

For persons listed in Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, did the organization provide any non-fixed
payments not described in lines 5 and 6? If "Yes," describe in Part III ............

Yes

Were any amounts reported in Form 990, Part VII, paid or accured pursuant to a contract that was
subject to the initial contract exception described in Regulations section 53.4958-4(a)(3)? If "Yes," describe
in Part III .............................

If "Yes" to line 8, did the organization also follow the rebuttable presumption procedure described in Regulations section 53.4958-6(c)? .........................

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.

Cat. No. 50053T

Schedule J (Form 990) 2014

Page 2

Part II

Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, and Highest Compensated Employees. Use duplicate copies if additional space is needed.

For each individual whose compensation must be reported in Schedule J, report compensation from the organization on row (i) and from related organizations, described in the
instructions, on row (ii). Do not list any individuals that are not listed on Form 990, Part VII.
Note. The sum of columns (B)(i)-(iii) for each listed individual must equal the total amount of Form 990, Part VII, Section A, line 1a, applicable column (D) and (E) amounts for that individual.

(A) Name and Title		(B) Breakdown of W-2 and/or 1099-MISC compensation			(C) Retirement and other deferred compensation	(D) Nontaxable benefits	(E) Total of columns (B)(i)-(D)	(F) Compensation in column(B) reported as deferred in prior Form 990
(A) Name and Title		(i) Base compensation	(ii) Bonus & incentive compensation	(iii) Other reportable compensation	(C) Retirement and other deferred compensation	(D) Nontaxable benefits	(E) Total of columns (B)(i)-(D)
1WILLIAM H MELLORPRES. & GENERAL COUNSEL	(i) (ii)	415,731 ............................... 0	72,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	1,627,000 ............................... 0	20,717 ............................... 0	2,135,448 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
2STEVEN ANDERSONMANAGING VP-CFO/SEC./TREAS.	(i) (ii)	182,261 ............................... 0	15,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	27,638 ............................... 0	7,019 ............................... 0	231,918 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
3BETH STEVENSVP FOR DEVELOPMENT	(i) (ii)	178,259 ............................... 0	15,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	25,058 ............................... 0	7,794 ............................... 0	226,111 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
4JOHN KRAMERVP FOR COMMUNICATIONS	(i) (ii)	254,818 ............................... 0	15,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	35,700 ............................... 0	20,717 ............................... 0	326,235 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
5DEBORAH SIMPSONVP OF STATE OFFICES	(i) (ii)	188,310 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	26,315 ............................... 0	20,717 ............................... 0	235,342 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
6DANA BERLINERLITIGATION DIRECTOR	(i) (ii)	251,907 ............................... 0	15,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	35,700 ............................... 0	7,925 ............................... 0	310,532 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
7SCOTT BULLOCKSENIOR ATTORNEY	(i) (ii)	242,897 ............................... 0	10,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	33,340 ............................... 0	7,924 ............................... 0	294,161 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
8CLARK NEILYSENIOR ATTORNEY	(i) (ii)	194,661 ............................... 0	10,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	29,573 ............................... 0	7,163 ............................... 0	241,397 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
9ROBERT GALLSENIOR ATTORNEY	(i) (ii)	195,862 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	29,157 ............................... 0	7,781 ............................... 0	232,800 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
10JEFFREY ROWESSENIOR ATTORNEY	(i) (ii)	190,361 ............................... 0	12,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	29,149 ............................... 0	7,777 ............................... 0	239,287 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0
11RICHARD KOMERSENIOR ATTORNEY	(i) (ii)	167,422 ............................... 0	12,000 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0	21,380 ............................... 0	8,222 ............................... 0	209,024 ............................... 0	0 ............................... 0

Schedule J (Form 990) 2014

Page 3

Part III

Supplemental Information

Provide the information, explanation, or descriptions required for Part I, lines 1a, 1b, 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, 7, and 8, and for Part II.
Also complete this part for any additional information.

Return Reference	Explanation
PART I, LINE 4B	A $75,000 CONTRIBUTION TO A SEC. 457(F) PLAN FOR WILLIAM H. MELLOR WAS AUTHORIZED AND FUNDED IN THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2015. AN ADDITIONAL $1,500,000 WAS AUTHORIZED AND ACCRUED IN THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2015 FOR A TOTAL OF $1,575,000.
PART I, LINE 7	THE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE DETERMINES, ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, THE BONUS TO BE AWARDED TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE INSTITUTE. FOR ALL OTHERS, BONUSES ARE DETERMINED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE INSTITUTE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. ALL BONUSES ARE BASED UPON A BOARD APPROVED BUDGET.

Schedule J (Form 990) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE M
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury

Internal Revenue Service

Noncash Contributions

Complete if the organizations answered "Yes" on Form 990, Part IV, lines 29 or 30.
Right pointing arrow large image

Attach to Form 990.
Right pointing arrow large image

Information about Schedule M (Form 990) and its instructions is at www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public Inspection

Name of the organization

INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Part I

Types of Property

	(a) Check if applicable	(b) Number of contributions or items contributed	(c) Noncash contribution amounts reported on Form 990, Part VIII, line 1g	(d) Method of determining noncash contribution amounts
1 Art—Works of art ....
2 Art—Historical treasures .
3 Art—Fractional interests ..
4 Books and publications ..
5 Clothing and household goods .......
6 Cars and other vehicles ..
7 Boats and planes ....
8 Intellectual property ...
9 Securities—Publicly traded .	X	51	1,020,165	FMV
10 Securities—Closely held stock .
11 Securities—Partnership, LLC, or trust interests ....
12 Securities—Miscellaneous ..
13 Qualified conservation contribution—Historic structures .....
14 Qualified conservation contribution—Other ...
15 Real estate—Residential .
16 Real estate—Commercial ..
17 Real estate—Other ...
18 Collectibles .....
19 Food inventory ...
20 Drugs and medical supplies .
21 Taxidermy ......
22 Historical artifacts ....
23 Scientific specimens ..
24 Archeological artifacts ...
25 Other ( )
26 Other ( )
27 Other ( )
28 Other ( )

Number of Forms 8283 received by the organization during the tax year for contributions
for which the organization completed Form 8283, Part IV, Donee Acknowledgement ...

Yes

30a

During the year, did the organization receive by contribution any property reported in Part I, lines 1 through 28, that

it must hold for at least three years from the date of the initial contribution, and which is not required to be used

for exempt purposes for the entire holding period? ..................

30a

If "Yes," describe the arrangement in Part II.

Does the organization have a gift acceptance policy that requires the review of any non-standard contributions?

Yes

32a

Does the organization hire or use third parties or related organizations to solicit, process, or sell noncash

contributions? ..........................

32a

Yes

If "Yes," describe in Part II.

If the organization did not report an amount in column (c) for a type of property for which column (a) is checked,

describe in Part II.

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990.

Cat. No. 51227J

Schedule M (Form 990) (2014)

Page 2

Part II

Supplemental Information. Provide the information required by Part I, lines 30b,
32b, and 33, and whether the organization is reporting in Part I, column (b), the number of contributions, the number of items received, or a combination of both. Also complete this part for any additional information.

Return Reference	Explanation
PART I, LINE 32B:	THE INSTITUTE UTILIZES A BROKERAGE FIRM TO SELL DONATED SECURITIES AND OTHER INVESTMENT VEHICLES.

Schedule M (Form 990) (2014)

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

- TIN:

SCHEDULE O
(Form 990 or 990-EZ)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Information to Form 990 or 990-EZ

Complete to provide information for responses to specific questions on
Form 990 or 990-EZ or to provide any additional information.
MediumBullet

Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
MediumBullet

Information about Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) and its instructions is at
www.irs.gov/form990.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2014

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE

Employer identification number

52-1744337

Return Reference	Explanation
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION A, LINE 1	WILLIAM H. MELLOR SERVES AS PRESIDENT & GENERAL COUNSEL AND IS EMPLOYED BY THE ORGANIZATION.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 11	THE FORM 990 WAS REVIEWED BY THE INSTITUTE'S AUDIT COMMITTEE IN CONSULTATION WITH THE INSTITUTE'S INDEPENDENT AUDITORS, AS NECESSARY. AFTER REVIEW BY THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, THE FORM 990 WAS DISTRIBUTED TO THE FULL BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 12C	ON AN ANNUAL BASIS BOTH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND EVERY EMPLOYEE REVIEW THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY AND MUST DISCLOSE ANY CONFLICTS WITH THE INSTITUTE. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REVIEWS THE POLICY AT OR AROUND ITS FINAL MEETING OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND EACH MEMBER PROVIDES WRITTEN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. EVERY EMPLOYEE RECEIVES AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF THE POLICY. ANY CONFLICTS OR POTENTIAL CONFLICTS ARE RESOLVED BY THE PRESIDENT OR OTHERWISE REPORTED BY THE PRESIDENT AND REVIEWED AND RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, LESS ANY MEMBER THAT MAY HAVE A CONFLICT OR POTENTIAL CONFLICT.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 15	THE PRESIDENT/GENERAL COUNSEL'S COMPENSATION IS SET BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT THE FALL BOARD MEETING. THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PROVIDES THE BOARD'S COMPENSATION COMMITTEE WITH PRESENT AND PAST COMPENSATION AMOUNTS FOR THE PRESIDENT/GENERAL COUNSEL, AS WELL AS COMPARABLE DATA FROM THE MOST RECENTLY AVAILABLE FORM 990 FOR SIMILARLY SITUATED NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. THE CFO ALSO ANNUALLY ENGAGES AN OUTSIDE VENDOR TO PROVIDE AN INDEPENDENT COMPENSATION SURVEY. THE FULL BOARD (EXCEPT FOR THE PRESIDENT/GENERAL COUNSEL, WHO IS RECUSED) THEN VOTES TO DETERMINE COMPENSATION AND THE DECISION IS CONTEMPORANEOUSLY RECORDED AND COMMUNICATED TO THE CFO BY THE CHAIRMAN AND PLACED IN THE PRESIDENT/GENERAL COUNSEL'S CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT FILE. DURING THE SUMMER BOARD MEETING, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AUTHORIZES FORECASTED COMPENSATION INCREASES FOR OTHER OFFICERS AND KEY EMPLOYEES THROUGH ITS APPROVAL OF THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR'S BUDGET. IN DETERMINING THE FISCAL YEAR BUDGET, THE COMPENSATION AMOUNTS OF OTHER OFFICERS AND KEY EMPLOYEES ARE DETERMINED IN COMPARISON TO SIMILARLY SITUATED OFFICERS AND KEY EMPLOYEES AT SIMILARLY SITUATED NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. SUCH DETERMINATION IS CONTEMPORANEOUSLY SUBSTANTIATED THROUGH RECORDATION OF THE PASSAGE OF THE BUDGET. THE COMPENSATION DETERMINATION IS PLACED IN THE OFFICER OR OTHER KEY EMPLOYEE'S CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT FILE.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 19	THE INSTITUTE'S 990 AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE AVAILABLE ON ITS AND OTHER WEBSITES. THE INSTITUTE'S 990, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AND OTHER IRS DOCUMENTATION, GOVERNING DOCUMENTS AND CERTAIN OTHER POLICIES ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC UPON REQUEST.
CASES IN LITIGATION:	PATEL V. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATION IJ SECURED THE STRICTEST LEGAL TEST FOR ECONOMIC REGULATIONS IN THE NATION WITH THIS VICTORY BEFORE THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT IN JUNE 2015. OUR CLIENTS WERE ASH PATEL AND OTHER EYEBROW THREADERS WHO WERE FIGHTING THE STATE OF TEXAS' IRRATIONAL ATTEMPTS TO REQUIRE THEM TO SPEND UPWARDS OF $20,000 AND 1,500 HOURS TO BECOME LICENSED COSMETOLOGISTS, EVEN THOUGH THE TRAINING REQUIRED TO BECOME A COSMETOLOGIST DOESN'T COVER EYEBROW THREADING. THESE SORTS OF LAWS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, AND ARE INSTEAD ENACTED TO PROTECT ESTABLISHED BUSINESSES FROM COMPETITION. WE WILL USE THIS RULING TO SECURE THE RIGHT TO EARN AN HONEST LIVING FOR ENTREPRENEURS IN TEXAS AND BEYOND. EDWARDS V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IJ SECURED AN IMPORTANT VICTORY FOR ECONOMIC LIBERTY AND COMMERCIAL SPEECH WHEN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT UNANIMOUSLY STRUCK DOWN WASHINGTON, D.C.'S TOUR GUIDE LICENSING LAW. UNDER THE LAW, OUR CLIENTS, BILL MAIN AND TONIA EDWARDS, WHO OWN A D.C. TOUR COMPANY, FACED FINES AND EVEN JAIL TIME FOR DESCRIBING NATIONAL MONUMENTS AND OTHER ATTRACTIONS WITHOUT FIRST PASSING A MULTIPLE CHOICE TEST. A GROWING NUMBER OF AMERICANS MAKE THEIR LIVING BY TALKING, AND THIS RULING WILL VINDICATE THEIR RIGHT TO DO SO WITHOUT UNNECESSARY GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE, WHETHER THEY WORK AS JOURNALISTS, PROFESSORS, OR TOUR GUIDES. ST. JOSEPH ABBEY V. CASTILLE THIS VICTORY IS ONE OF ONLY A HANDFUL SINCE THE 1930S IN WHICH FEDERAL APPELLATE COURTS HAVE ENFORCED THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO ECONOMIC LIBERTY. OUR CLIENTS, THE MONKS OF ST. JOSEPH ABBEY, WANTED TO SELL THEIR HANDMADE CASKETS TO SUPPORT THEIR EDUCATIONAL AND HEALTH CARE EXPENSES, BUT THE STATE BOARD OF EMBALMERS AND FUNERAL DIRECTORS TRIED TO SHUT THEM DOWN BECAUSE IT WAS A CRIME IN LOUISIANA FOR ANYONE BUT A GOVERNMENT-LICENSED FUNERAL DIRECTOR TO SELL CASKETS TO THE PUBLIC. IN STRIKING DOWN THE LAW, THE 5TH U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS SAID, "THE GREAT DEFERENCE DUE STATE ECONOMIC REGULATION DOES NOT DEMAND JUDICIAL BLINDNESS TO THE HISTORY OF A CHALLENGED RULE OR THE CONTEXT OF ITS ADOPTION NOR DOES IT REQUIRE COURTS TO ACCEPT NONSENSICAL EXPLANATIONS FOR REGULATION." THE RULING OPENS THE DOOR TO STRIKE DOWN OTHER IRRATIONAL LICENSING LAWS THAT PROTECT INDUSTRY INSIDERS FROM COMPETITION. IN FY15, IJ WAS AWARDED $844,795 IN ATTORNEYS' FEES AS A RESULT OF THIS VICTORY.
BRANTLEY V. KUNTZ	RELYING ON THE ST. JOSEPH ABBEY RULING DESCRIBED ABOVE, IN JANUARY 2015 A FEDERAL COURT IN TEXAS STRUCK DOWN A SET OF LAWS PREVENTING SMALL AFRICAN HAIR BRAIDING SCHOOLS FROM TEACHING STUDENTS TO BRAID HAIR FOR A LIVING WITHOUT BECOMING FULL-BLOWN BARBER COLLEGES, WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE COSTLY FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT THAT ARE TOTALLY UNNECESSARY FOR A BRAIDING SCHOOL. THE RULING WILL HELP ENTREPRENEURS IN TEXAS AND ELSEWHERE WHO ARE FIGHTING IRRATIONAL GOVERNMENT LICENSING SCHEMES. IJ WAS AWARDED $134,445 IN ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS AS A RESULT OF OUR WORK ON THIS CASE. COOKSEY V. FUTRELL IJ CLIENT STEVE COOKSEY WANTED TO GIVE PERSONAL ADVICE ON DIET AND LIFESTYLE CHOICES RELATED TO HIS SUCCESSFUL TREATMENT OF HIS TYPE 2 DIABETES, BUT THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA SAID THAT DOING SO CONSTITUTED THE UNLICENSED-AND THUS CRIMINAL-PRACTICE OF DIETETICS. IJ SECURED AN IMPORTANT RULING WHEN THE 4TH U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED AN EARLIER TRIAL-COURT DISMISSAL OF THE LAWSUIT. WHILE WE WERE LITIGATING THE CASE ON THE MERITS, THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA CAPITULATED AND ADOPTED NEW GUIDELINES ALLOWING STEVE AND OTHERS TO GIVE ORDINARY DIET ADVICE WITHOUT A GOVERNMENT LICENSE. IT'S ANOTHER VICTORY FOR ENTREPRENEURS AND CONSUMERS IN OUR FIGHT TO PROTECT OCCUPATIONAL SPEECH FROM GOVERNMENT CENSORS. HINES V. TEXAS BOARD OF VETERINARY MEDICAL EXAMINERS WE REPRESENT DR. RON HINES, A LICENSED VETERINARIAN WHO USES THE INTERNET TO HELP PET OWNERS AROUND THE WORLD CARE FOR THEIR ANIMALS. HE DOESN'T PRESCRIBE MEDICINE OR PERFORM PROCEDURES, AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT HIS WORK POSES ANY DANGER, YET THE TEXAS VET BOARD SHUT HIM DOWN BECAUSE HIS EMAILS AND VIDEO CHATS VIOLATED A STATE LAW STIPULATING THAT VETERINARIANS MUST EXAMINE AN ANIMAL IN PERSON BEFORE GIVING ADVICE OVER THE INTERNET. WE ARE CHALLENGING THE LAW NOT ONLY TO VINDICATE RON'S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT, BUT ALSO TO PROTECT INTERNET FREEDOM AND FREE SPEECH FOR AMERICANS EVERYWHERE.
ROSEMOND V. CONWAY	THIS IS A CHALLENGE TO THE STATE OF KENTUCKY'S ATTEMPTS TO CENSOR OUR CLIENT, JOHN ROSEMOND, AND HIS NATIONALLY SYNDICATED PARENTAL ADVICE COLUMN AS THE UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF PSYCHOLOGY BECAUSE HE GIVES INDIVIDUALIZED ADVICE IN THE COLUMN. THE STATE BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY, WHICH INITIATED THE CLAIM, ALSO STATED THAT BECAUSE JOHN IS LICENSED TO PRACTICE PSYCHOLOGY IN NORTH CAROLINA, BUT NOT KENTUCKY, HE MAY NOT CALL HIMSELF A "FAMILY PSYCHOLOGIST" IN THE TAGLINE OF A NEWSPAPER COLUMN PUBLISHED IN KENTUCKY. THE BOARD THREATENED JOHN WITH UP TO ONE YEAR IN JAIL AND $1,000 IN FINES FOR EACH COLUMN PUBLISHED IN THE STATE. A VICTORY IN THIS CASE WILL NOT ONLY VINDICATE JOHN'S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE WITH HIS READERS, BUT ALSO SEND A STRONG MESSAGE TO OTHER STATES TRYING TO USE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING LAWS TO SQUELCH FREE SPEECH. BURRIS V. COBB THE STATE OF ARKANSAS IS ATTEMPTING TO STOP OUR CLIENT, DR. BEN BURRIS, A LICENSED DENTIST AND ORTHODONTIST, FROM OFFERING LOW-COST DENTAL CLEANINGS AT A FRACTION OF WHAT OTHER DENTISTS CHARGE IN ORDER TO GIVE LOW-INCOME FAMILIES ACCESS TO REGULAR DENTAL CARE. THE STATE DENTISTRY BOARD IS INVOKING A LAW THAT BANS LICENSED DENTAL SPECIALISTS, LIKE ORTHODONTISTS, FROM DOING EVEN SIMPLE DENTAL WORK OUTSIDE THEIR SPECIALTY, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE FULLY LICENSED DENTISTS. A VICTORY WILL NOT ONLY VINDICATE THE BEDROCK AMERICAN PRINCIPLE THAT GOVERNMENT CAN'T IRRATIONALLY RESTRICT ECONOMIC LIBERTY, BUT ALSO BENEFIT CONSUMERS BY LOWERING COSTS AND INCREASING ACCESS TO CARE. KELLY V. WHITMORE IN THIS CASE, WE ARE CHALLENGING THE STATE OF ARIZONA'S ANTI-COMPETITIVE REQUIREMENT THAT ANIMAL MASSAGE THERAPISTS BECOME LICENSED VETERINARIANS. FAILING TO COMPLY RISKS UP TO SIX MONTHS IN JAIL AND FINES OF $3,500 PER VIOLATION. BUT MASSAGE THERAPISTS DO NOT NEED A MEDICAL DEGREE TO MASSAGE HUMANS, AND ANIMAL MASSAGE THERAPISTS DO NOT NEED TO SPEND HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND FOUR YEARS IN VETERINARY SCHOOL THAT DOESN'T EVEN REQUIRE THAT THEY LEARN MASSAGE. A VICTORY WILL NOT ONLY HELP THESE HARD-WORKING ENTREPRENEURS AND THE PET OWNERS WHO WISH TO UTILIZE THEIR SERVICES, BUT ALSO SEND A STRONG MESSAGE TO VET LICENSING BOARDS IN OTHER STATES CONSIDERING SIMILAR RESTRICTIONS.
MARTINEZ V. MULLEN; ECK V. BATTLE AND COLLINS V. BATTLE;	WESTPHAL V. NORTHCUTT THESE CASES CHALLENGE RESTRICTIONS BY STATE DENTAL BOARDS IN CONNECTICUT, GEORGIA, AND ALABAMA, RESPECTIVELY, THAT BAN NON-DENTISTS FROM PROVIDING TEETH WHITENING SERVICES. THE SERVICES PROVIDE OVER-THE-COUNTER TEETH WHITENING PRODUCTS THAT CUSTOMERS APPLY THEMSELVES, AS WELL AS A CLEAN AND COMFORTABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR DOING SO. THE BANS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HEALTH AND SAFETY AND ARE DESIGNED TO PROTECT LICENSED DENTISTS FROM NON-DENTIST COMPETITORS WHO OFFER THE SAME SERVICE IN MALLS AND SALONS AT A FRACTION OF THE PRICE. LEGAL VICTORIES IN THESE CASES WILL BENEFIT ENTREPRENEURS AND CONSUMERS ALIKE BY INCREASING COMPETITION AND DRIVING DOWN PRICES. SYLLA V. KOHLER; EARL V. SMITH; NIANG V. CARROLL THESE CASES CHALLENGE LAWS IN WASHINGTON STATE, ARKANSAS, AND MISSOURI, RESPECTIVELY, THAT REQUIRE AFRICAN HAIR BRAIDERS TO BECOME LICENSED COSMETOLOGISTS BEFORE THEY CAN WORK. IN ORDER TO GET A LICENSE, BRAIDERS MUST SPEND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND UPWARDS OF 1,500 HOURS ON COSMETOLOGY TRAINING, NOT ONE MINUTE OF WHICH TEACHES AFRICAN HAIR BRAIDING. IN WASHINGTON STATE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE 1,600 HOURS OF REQUIRED TRAINING IS MORE THAN 10 TIMES THE NUMBER OF HOURS REQUIRED TO BECOME AN ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER, EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIAN, AND SECURITY GUARD COMBINED. IN MARCH 2015, ARKANSAS BECAME THE FIRST STATE TO PASS IJ'S MODEL LEGISLATION EXEMPTING BRAIDERS FROM HAVING TO OBTAIN A COSMETOLOGY LICENSE, AND IN APRIL 2015, WASHINGTON STATE PASSED A LEGALLY BINDING RULE ALLOWING BRAIDERS TO WORK WITHOUT HAVING TO OBTAIN COSMETOLOGY LICENSES. THESE ARE VICTORIES NOT ONLY FOR THE BRAIDERS THEMSELVES, BUT ALSO FOR THE COUNTLESS CONSUMERS WHO WISH TO USE THEIR SERVICES. THE MISSOURI LAWSUIT IS ONGOING. LOVING V. IRS IN 2014, WE WON AN IMPORTANT VICTORY WHEN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT RULED THAT THE IRS HAD NO LEGAL AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE A NATIONWIDE LICENSING SCHEME ON TAX-RETURN PREPARERS. THE AGENCY SOUGHT TO FORCE ANYONE WHO IS PAID TO PREPARE TAX RETURNS-EXCEPT INDIVIDUALS IN CERTAIN FAVORED PROFESSIONS AND TYPES OF BUSINESSES-TO PAY FEES, PASS AN EXAM, AND TAKE CONTINUING EDUCATION CLASSES EVERY YEAR JUST TO GET THE GOVERNMENT'S PERMISSION TO EARN A LIVING. THE REQUIREMENTS WERE SO COSTLY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE DRIVEN MOST PART-TIME TAX PREPARERS OUT OF BUSINESS. THE DECISION IS AN IMPORTANT VICTORY NOT ONLY FOR MORE THAN 350,000 TAX PREPARERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND THEIR CUSTOMERS, BUT ALSO FOR COUNTLESS OTHER ENTREPRENEURS FIGHTING OVERREACHING GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. IN FY15, WE WERE AWARDED $257,886 IN ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS AS A RESULT OF THIS VICTORY.
DINA GALASSINI V. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS; WORLEY V. ROBERTS;	JUSTICE V. HOSEMANN THESE CASES CHALLENGE LAWS IN ARIZONA, FLORIDA, AND MISSISSIPPI, RESPECTIVELY, THAT REQUIRE ORDINARY AMERICANS WHO WANT TO JOIN TOGETHER TO SPEAK OUT IN ELECTIONS TO BECOME POLITICAL COMMITTEES REGULATED BY THE STATE. POLITICAL COMMITTEES MUST REGISTER WITH THE GOVERNMENT; APPOINT A DIRECTOR OR CHAIRMAN AND TREASURER; DESIGNATE A BANK ACCOUNT; KEEP TRACK OF EXPENDITURES; AND FILE REPORTS, EVEN IF THEY ARE INFORMAL GROUPS THAT RAISE VERY SMALL AMOUNTS OF MONEY. LAWS LIKE THESE HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON POLITICAL SPEECH AND VIOLATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT. COURT VICTORIES WILL ENABLE PEOPLE FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ELECTORAL PROCESS-AN AMERICAN BIRTHRIGHT. AFTER WE WON THE GALASSINI CASE IN THE TRIAL COURT, THE STATE CHANGED THE LAW TO EXEMPT SMALL GROUPS FROM POLITICAL COMMITTEES. IN FY15, WE WERE AWARDED $9,000 IN FEES AND COSTS IN THE WORLEY CASE. SEATON V. WIENER THIS WAS A CHALLENGE TO MINNESOTA'S RESTRICTIONS ON CAMPAIGN FINANCING. UNDER THE LAW, THE STATE LIMITED THE AMOUNT OF MONEY AN INDIVIDUAL COULD DONATE TO A CANDIDATE TO $1,000. BUT ONCE A CANDIDATE RAISED $12,500 IN CONTRIBUTIONS BETWEEN $500 AND $1,000, THAT LIMIT WAS ARBITRARILY CUT IN HALF. CONTRIBUTING TO CANDIDATES FOR POLITICAL OFFICE IS A WELL-RECOGNIZED FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT THAT SHOULD NOT BE DISHED OUT ON A FIRST-COME, FIRST-SERVED BASIS. IN 2014, A FEDERAL JUDGE FOUND THE LAW TO BE LIKELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND SUSPENDED THE PROGRAM. IN 2015, THE LEGISLATURE REPEALED THE LAW IN RESPONSE TO IJ'S LAWSUIT. THIS IS A MAJOR VICTORY FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN ELECTIONS AND MEANS THAT HOW MUCH INDIVIDUALS CAN CONTRIBUTE TO THE CANDIDATE OF THEIR CHOICE IS NO LONGER DEPENDENT ON HOW MUCH THEIR NEIGHBORS HAVE ALREADY CONTRIBUTED. FARRIS V. SEABROOK IJ CLIENT ROBIN FARRIS FIRST GOT INVOLVED IN POLITICS WHEN SHE STARTED ORGANIZING A CAMPAIGN TO RECALL AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AFTER HEARING ABOUT SERIOUS CHARGES OF MISCONDUCT ON HIS PART. BUT SHE SOON RAN AFOUL OF WASHINGTON STATE'S CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW BECAUSE SHE ENLISTED THE PRO BONO SERVICES OF TWO LOCAL ATTORNEYS TO NAVIGATE THE STATE'S COMPLICATED RECALL PROCEDURES, AND THE LAW LIMITS TO $800 CONTRIBUTIONS TO RECALL CAMPAIGNS. WE WON A VICTORY FOR ROBIN IN NOVEMBER 2012 WHEN A FEDERAL COURT CONCLUDED THAT THE STATE HAD UNCONSTITUTIONALLY ENFORCED THE CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AGAINST THE RECALL CAMPAIGN. IN FY15, WE WERE AWARDED $243,968 IN ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS AS A RESULT OF THIS VICTORY.
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE V. STATE OF WASHINGTON	AFTER WINNING THE FARRIS CASE ABOVE, IJ SOUGHT ATTORNEYS' FEES FROM THE WASHINGTON PUBLIC DISCLOSURE COMMISSION (PDC), A PROCESS THAT IS CUSTOMARY IN CIVIL RIGHTS LAWSUITS. THE PDC NOT ONLY CHALLENGED THE FEES IN COURT, BUT IT ALSO FILED A COMPLAINT AGAINST OUR CLIENT, RECALL DALE WASHAM, FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE IJ'S REPRESENTATION AS AN IN-KIND CONTRIBUTION TO THE CAMPAIGN. CLASSIFYING OUR SERVICES AS A CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION COULD HAVE PUT IN SERIOUS JEOPARDY THE ABILITY OF PUBLIC-INTEREST GROUPS LIKE IJ AND THE ACLU TO DEFEND THEIR CLIENTS' RIGHTS. IN FEBRUARY 2015, THE COURT RULED THAT FREE LEGAL SERVICES TO PROTECT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE NOT A CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION. AS A RESULT OF THIS VICTORY, WE WERE AWARDED $406,617 IN ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS. KAGAN V. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS IN NEW ORLEANS, WE REPRESENTED FOUR TOUR GUIDES WHO WERE CHALLENGING A LOCAL LAW THAT SUBJECTS TOUR GUIDES TO FINES AND EVEN JAIL TIME IF THEY TALK ABOUT THE HISTORY AND CULTURE OF THE CITY WITHOUT FIRST PASSING A HISTORY EXAM AND THEN, EVERY TWO YEARS, A DRUG TEST AND FBI CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK. WHILE THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT STRUCK DOWN A SIMILAR LAW WE CHALLENGED IN WASHINGTON, D.C., THE 5TH U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UPHELD NEW ORLEANS' RESTRICTIONS. WE APPEALED THE RULING TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, WHICH DECLINED TO ACCEPT REVIEW. FREENOR V. MAYOR AND ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF SAVANNAH THANKS TO OUR PRIOR LITIGATION, INCLUDING THE EDWARDS AND KAGAN CASES DESCRIBED ABOVE, FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEAL ARE SPLIT ON THE ISSUE OF WHETHER CALLING A REGULATION "OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING" CANCELS OUT FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS FOR FREE SPEECH. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WILL NEED TO RESOLVE THIS DIFFERENCE, AND WE ARE LITIGATING THE ISSUE WITH A LAWSUIT IN SAVANNAH, GEORGIA. THERE, TOUR GUIDES RISK FINES OF $1,000, 30 DAYS IN JAIL, AND EVEN FORCED PARTICIPATION IN A MUNICIPAL WORK GANG IF THEY FAIL TO OBTAIN THE GOVERNMENT'S PERMISSION BEFORE THEY WORK. IJ IS PIONEERING LITIGATION IN THIS AREA OF THE LAW, AND A VICTORY IN SAVANNAH WILL INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WILL WEIGH IN ON THE ISSUE. A FAVORABLE RULING WILL BENEFIT ENTREPRENEURS AND CONSUMERS ALIKE BY OPENING UP COMPETITION, DRIVING DOWN COSTS, AND INCREASING CHOICE.
WAUGH V. NEVADA STATE BOARD OF COSMETOLOGY	IN NEVADA, ANYONE CAN PRACTICE MAKEUP ARTISTRY, AND ANYONE SHOULD BE FREE TO TEACH IT. BUT THE STATE REQUIRES PEOPLE LIKE OUR CLIENTS, LISSETTE WAUGH AND WENDY ROBIN, WHO WANT TO TEACH THE ART AND ARTISTRY OF MAKEUP APPLICATION, TO FIRST OBTAIN A COSMETOLOGY INSTRUCTOR'S LICENSE. THAT MEANS THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO SPEND HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS AND AN ADDITIONAL 700 HOURS OF TRAINING IN SUBJECTS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH MAKEUP ARTISTRY. IN JUNE 2014, A FEDERAL JUDGE PARED BACK SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS BUT LEFT IN PLACE OTHER ONEROUS AND IRRELEVANT REGULATIONS. WHILE WE WERE APPEALING THE DECISION TO THE 9TH U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, THE NEVADA LEGISLATURE STEPPED IN AND REFORMED THE LAW. THIS IS A VICTORY FOR ENTREPRENEURS, THE ASPIRING ONES THEY WANT TO TEACH, AND THE CONSUMERS WHO WILL USE THEIR SERVICES. MEMBRENO V. CITY OF HIALEAH IN HIALEAH, FLORIDA, WE REPRESENT SILVIO MEMBRENO, WHO CAME TO THE UNITED STATES FROM NICARAGUA AND HAS SUCCESSFULLY EARNED A LIVING AS A FLOWER VENDOR FOR MORE THAN 15 YEARS. BUT THE CITY IS TRYING TO PUT SILVIO AND HIS FELLOW VENDORS OUT OF BUSINESS BY ENACTING ANTI-COMPETITIVE REGULATIONS THAT ARBITRARILY PROTECT SOME BUSINESSES WHILE HARMING OTHERS. A VICTORY WILL BENEFIT THESE HARDWORKING ENTREPRENEURS AND THEIR CUSTOMERS, AND FURTHER SECURE THE RIGHT TO EARN AN HONEST LIVING. ASTRAMECKI V. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE THIS CASE, ON BEHALF OF HOME BAKERS JANE ASTRAMECKI AND MARA HECK, WAS ONE OF THE FIRST IN IJ'S NATIONAL FOOD FREEDOM INITIATIVE, WHICH IS DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE WHO RAISE, PRODUCE, MAKE, COOK, AND SELL THE FOOD WE EAT, ALONG WITH THE CONSUMERS WHO WISH TO USE THEIR SERVICES. WE SECURED AN IMPORTANT VICTORY FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS WHEN IT REVERSED A LOWER-COURT RULING UPHOLDING THE RESTRICTIONS AND SENT THE CASE BACK DOWN TO THE TRIAL COURT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, THE STATE LEGISLATURE CHANGED THE LAW. THE RULING AND LEGISLATIVE CHANGE NOT ONLY BENEFIT FOOD ENTREPRENEURS AND CONSUMERS, BUT ALSO SEND A STRONG MESSAGE TO OTHER STATES CONSIDERING IMPLEMENTING SIMILAR RESTRICTIONS ON SMALL-SCALE COTTAGE FOODS ENTREPRENEURS.
RICKETTS V. MIAMI SHORES	FOR 17 YEARS, HERMINE RICKETTS AND HER HUSBAND, TOM CARROLL, USED THEIR FRONT YARD IN MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA, TO GROW FOOD FOR THEIR OWN PERSONAL CONSUMPTION. AND FOR 17 YEARS, NOBODY HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT. BUT IN MAY 2013, THE CITY AMENDED ITS ORDINANCE TO MAKE CLEAR THAT FRONT-YARD VEGETABLE GARDENS WERE PROHIBITED. ONLY VEGETABLES ARE EXPLICITLY BANNED-FLAMINGOES, FRUIT TREES, AND GARDEN GNOMES ARE JUST FINE. UNABLE TO BEAR THE HEFTY FINE OF $50 A DAY, HERMINE AND TOM RELUCTANTLY UPROOTED THEIR GARDEN. BUT THEY TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO CHALLENGE THE BAN IN COURT. THE LAWSUIT AIMS TO VINDICATE THE RIGHT OF ALL AMERICANS TO PEACEFULLY USE THEIR OWN PROPERTY TO SUPPORT THEIR OWN FAMILIES. OCHEESEE CREAMERY V. PUTNAM AND NEWTON IJ CLIENT MARY LOU WESSELHOEFT IS A DAIRY FARMER FROM THE PANHANDLE OF FLORIDA. BECAUSE SHE AND HER CUSTOMERS SUBSCRIBE TO AN ALL-NATURAL PHILOSOPHY, SHE REFUSES TO ADD ANYTHING TO THE PASTEURIZED SKIM MILK SHE PRODUCES FROM HER SMALL FAMILY FARM. BUT IN FLORIDA, PASTEURIZED SKIM MILK CAN'T BE CALLED THAT UNLESS IT'S FIRST ARTIFICIALLY INJECTED WITH VITAMIN A. AS A RESULT, THE STATE ORDERED MARY LOU TO STOP SELLING HER MILK UNLESS SHE EITHER INJECTED THE MILK WITH VITAMIN A OR USED A CONFUSING AND MISLEADING LABEL, "NON-GRADE 'A' MILK PRODUCT, NATURAL MILK VITAMINS REMOVED." THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS MARY LOU'S RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE TRUTHFUL INFORMATION TO HER CUSTOMERS, SO SHE TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO FIGHT BACK IN COURT. WHEN GOVERNMENT CENSORS TRUTHFUL INFORMATION, EVERYONE LOSES: THE ENTREPRENEURS TRYING TO EARN AN HONEST LIVING AND THE CONSUMERS THEY SERVE. LMP SERVICES, INC. V. CITY OF CHICAGO IN CHICAGO, IT IS ILLEGAL FOR FOOD TRUCKS TO OPERATE WITHIN 200 FEET OF ANY FIXED BUSINESS THAT SELLS FOOD, INCLUDING SUPERMARKETS, CONVENIENCE STORES, AND EVEN GAS STATIONS. THE LAW EFFECTIVELY SHUTS VENDORS OUT OF DOWNTOWN AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PROTECTING HEALTH AND SAFETY-IT WAS ENACTED AT THE BEHEST OF A FEW POLITICALLY CONNECTED RESTAURATEURS TO PROTECT THEIR BOTTOM LINE. VENDORS WHO OPERATE TOO CLOSE TO A RESTAURANT FACE FINES OF UP TO $2,000, WHICH IS 10 TIMES HIGHER THAN THE PENALTY FOR PARKING IN FRONT OF A FIRE HYDRANT. SO THREE FOOD TRUCK OPERATORS TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO CHALLENGE THE LAW IN COURT. A VICTORY WILL ADVANCE THE PRINCIPLE THAT ECONOMIC PROTECTIONISM IS NOT A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT INTEREST, WHICH WILL BENEFIT CONSUMERS AND ENTREPRENEURS ALIKE.
SPEED'S AUTO SERVICES V. PORTLAND; HALSNIK V. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PUBLIC	TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION IJ'S TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVE WORKS ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO VINDICATE THE RIGHT OF DRIVERS TO EARN AN HONEST LIVING. IN PORTLAND, OREGON, AND TAMPA, FLORIDA, WE ARE CHALLENGING LAWS THAT IMPOSE A MINIMUM FARE ON SMALL SEDAN COMPANIES IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE PROFITS OF ENTRENCHED BUSINESSES. THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB IS TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC, NOT THE PROFITS OF PRIVATE BUSINESSES, AND VICTORIES IN THESE CASES WILL ADVANCE THE PRINCIPLE THAT ECONOMIC PROTECTIONISM HAS NO PLACE UNDER A CONSTITUTIONAL RULE OF LAW. SAN DIEGO TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION V. SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM; JOE SANFELIPPO CABS, INC. V. CITY OF MILWAUKEE IN SAN DIEGO AND MILWAUKEE, ENTRENCHED CAB COMPANIES HAVE FILED LEGAL CHALLENGES TO THEIR CITIES' REPEAL OF LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF CABS ALLOWED TO OPERATE ON CITY STREETS. THE LIMITS SERVED NO PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO PROTECT THE PROFITS OF A SMALL GROUP OF PRE-EXISTING TAXI-PERMIT OWNERS. BY LIFTING THE CAPS, SAN DIEGO AND MILWAUKEE HAVE GIVEN HUNDREDS OF DRIVERS, LIKE OUR CLIENTS ABDI ABDISALAN AND SAAD MALIK, A SHOT AT BECOMING THEIR OWN BOSSES. SO WE INTERVENED IN THESE CASES TO ENSURE THAT THE VOICES OF DRIVERS-THE TRUE PARTIES OF INTEREST-ARE HEARD IN THESE LAWSUITS. ILLINOIS TRANSPORTATION TRADE ASSOCIATION V. CITY OF CHICAGO IN CHICAGO, EXISTING CAB COMPANIES ARE SUING TO FREEZE THE CITY'S TAXI REGULATIONS IN ORDER TO PREEMPTIVELY SQUELCH COMPETITION FROM RIDESHARING COMPANIES LIKE SIDECAR, LYFT, AND UBERX AND PROTECT THEIR BOTTOM LINE. BUT CONSUMERS AND ENTREPRENEURS SHOULD DECIDE WHICH TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE IN CHICAGO, SO IJ TEAMED UP WITH THREE RIDESHARING DRIVERS TO INTERVENE IN THE LAWSUIT AND PROVE THAT ENTRENCHED BUSINESSES HAVE NO LEGAL RIGHT TO ECONOMIC PROTECTIONISM.
GREEN CAB V. CITY OF BOWLING GREEN	IN OHIO, JOHN RINALDI WANTS TO BRING A NEW KIND OF TRANSPORTATION OPTION TO THE TOWN OF BOWLING GREEN. HIS BUSINESS MODEL UTILIZES CUTTING-EDGE TECHNOLOGY, ECO-FRIENDLY PRIUSES, A STAFF OF FRIENDLY DRIVERS, AND $3-A-HEAD RIDES. BUT THE CITY MAKES THAT IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE IT CAPS AT 16 THE NUMBER OF TAXI PERMITS ALLOWED ON CITY STREETS. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO USE ITS POWER TO PROTECT ITSELF AND OTHER ESTABLISHED BUSINESSES FROM COMPETITION, SO JOHN TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO FILE SUIT IN STATE COURT. A VICTORY WILL BENEFIT CONSUMERS AND ENTREPRENEURS NOT ONLY IN OHIO, BUT ALSO NATIONWIDE AS OTHER CITIES AND TOWNS CONSIDER ENACTING-OR REPEALING-SIMILAR CAPS. COURTNEY V. GOLTZ FOR THE PAST 15 YEARS, JIM AND CLIFF COURTNEY HAVE TRIED TO LAUNCH A BOAT SERVICE TO BETTER SERVE THE REMOTE COMMUNITY IN UPSTATE WASHINGTON STATE WHERE THEY LIVE. BUT THE STATE REQUIRES JIM AND CLIFF TO EITHER OBTAIN THE EXISTING FERRY COMPANY'S PERMISSION TO COMPETE, OR PROVE IN A TRIAL-LIKE HEARING THAT THE EXISTING COMPANY IS NOT PROVIDING "REASONABLE AND ADEQUATE SERVICE AND THAT A NEW SERVICE IS NECESSARY. BECAUSE THIS IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL RESTRAINT ON ECONOMIC LIBERTY, JIM AND CLIFF TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO FIGHT BACK. A VICTORY WILL PROTECT THE RIGHT OF ALL AMERICANS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ECONOMIC LIFE OF THE NATION. COLON HEALTH CENTERS OF AMERICA, LLC V. HAZEL VIRGINIA MAKES IT ILLEGAL TO OFFER NEW MEDICAL SERVICES OR PURCHASE CERTAIN TYPES OF MEDICAL EQUIPMENT WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING A SPECIAL PERMISSION SLIP FROM THE GOVERNMENT CALLED A "CERTIFICATE OF NEED." THE CERTIFICATE-OF-NEED PROGRAM AMOUNTS TO NOTHING MORE THAN A STATE-GRANTED MONOPOLY FOR POLITICALLY FAVORED BUSINESSES. OUR CLIENTS IN THIS CASE, DR. MARK BAUMEL AND DR. MARK MONTEFERRANTE, HAVE JOINED FORCES WITH IJ TO CHALLENGE THE LAW AND INCREASE VIRGINIANS' CHOICES FOR MEDICAL CARE. BECAUSE 35 OTHER STATES HAVE SIMILAR CON REQUIREMENTS, A VICTORY HERE WILL HELP CONSUMERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
CASINO REINVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY V. CHARLES AND LUCINDA BIRNBAUM	IJ CLIENT CHARLIE BIRNBAUM'S IS A CLASSIC AMERICAN STORY. HIS PARENTS WERE IMMIGRANTS WHO MET HIDING IN THE FORESTS OF POLAND DURING WORLD WAR II. THEY LEFT HIM MANY THINGS, INCLUDING A HOME NEAR THE BOARDWALK IN ATLANTIC CITY. THAT HOME-HIS PARENTS' FOOTHOLD IN THEIR ADOPTED COUNTRY-HAS BEEN A SOURCE OF LOVE, TRAGEDY, AND RENEWAL TO THE BIRNBAUM FAMILY FOR THE PAST 50 YEARS. A STATE GOVERNMENT AGENCY, HOWEVER, WANTS TO TAKE THE PROPERTY USING EMINENT DOMAIN, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS NO SPECIFIC PLANS FOR THE BUILDING OR THE LAND. SO CHARLIE TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO CHALLENGE THE TAKING IN COURT. A VICTORY WILL PROTECT CHARLIE'S RIGHT TO OWN AND ENJOY HIS PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF EVERYONE IN NEW JERSEY. COMMUNITY YOUTH ATHLETIC CENTER V. NATIONAL CITY THE COMMUNITY YOUTH ATHLETIC CENTER (CYAC) IS A NON-PROFIT AFTER-SCHOOL FITNESS AND MENTORING PROGRAM IN NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA, THAT HELPS HUNDREDS OF LOW-INCOME KIDS STAY OFF THE STREETS, IN SCHOOL, AND ON THE PATH TO LIFE SUCCESS. RATHER THAN ENCOURAGE THE CYAC'S GOOD WORK ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ATTEMPTED TO APPLY A PHONY "BLIGHT" DESIGNATION TO THE GYM AND NEARLY 700 OTHER PROPERTIES SO IT COULD TRANSFER THEM TO A LUXURY CONDO DEVELOPER USING ITS POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN. WE DEFEATED THE PLAN IN THE SPRING OF 2011 AND SET IMPORTANT PROPERTY RIGHTS PRECEDENT IN CALIFORNIA IN THE PROCESS. BUT THE CITY APPEALED THE RULING, SENDING US TO THE STATE APPEALS COURT TO DEFEND OUR CLIENTS' RIGHT TO THEIR PROPERTY, WHERE WE ALSO SECURED A VICTORY FOR THE GYM AND REINFORCED VITAL PROTECTIONS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS ACROSS THE STATE. IN FY15, WE WERE AWARDED $1,466,395 IN FEES FROM THE CITY FOR OUR WORK IN THIS CASE. CENTRAL RADIO COMPANY V. CITY OF NORFOLK IJ IS STANDING UP FOR A THRIVING SMALL BUSINESS IN NORFOLK, VIRGINIA, THAT IS NOT ONLY AT RISK OF LOSING ITS PROPERTY THROUGH EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE, BUT ALSO BEING CENSORED FOR EXPRESSING AN OPINION THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T LIKE. IN EARLY 2012, THE OWNERS OF CENTRAL RADIO COMPANY HUNG A BANNER ON THEIR BUILDING PROTESTING THE GOVERNMENT'S ATTEMPT TO TAKE THEIR PROPERTY THROUGH EMINENT DOMAIN. BUT THE CITY TOLD THEM TO TAKE IT DOWN BECAUSE IT WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE CITY'S SIGN CODE, EVEN THOUGH OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE AREA HAVE SIGNS AS LARGE AS OR LARGER THAN CENTRAL RADIO'S. A VICTORY IN THIS CASE WILL PROTECT AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR NATION'S HISTORY: THE RIGHT TO PEACEABLY PROTEST GOVERNMENT ABUSE USING SIGNS.
NEIGHBORHOOD ENTERPRISES V. CITY OF ST. LOUIS	SIMILAR TO OUR CLIENTS IN THE CENTRAL RADIO CASE ABOVE, ST. LOUIS RESIDENT JIM ROOS DECIDED TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST HIS LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S ABUSE OF ITS POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN. HE HAD A LARGE PROTEST MURAL PAINTED ON HIS BUILDING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD TARGETED FOR REDEVELOPMENT. BUT THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS DIDN'T LIKE THE CRITICISM AND INSISTED THAT THE MURAL BE TAKEN DOWN AS A VIOLATION OF LOCAL SIGN CODES. WE WON THE CASE BEFORE THE 8TH U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IN 2011, BUT REMAIN IN DISTRICT COURT ASKING FOR A JUDGMENT DECLARING JIM'S RIGHT TO MAINTAIN THE MURAL. SUCH A RULING WILL SECURE THE RIGHT OF AMERICANS FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE TO EFFECTIVELY PROTEST GOVERNMENT ABUSE WITHOUT FIRST HAVING TO GET THE GOVERNMENT'S PERMISSION. UNITED STATES V. $32,820.56 FROM MRS. LADY'S, INC. ACCOUNT #XXXXX23264 FOR 38 YEARS, CAROLE HINDERS HAS OWNED AND OPERATED MRS. LADY'S MEXICAN FOOD IN SPIRIT LAKE, IOWA. MRS. LADY'S ACCEPTS ONLY CASH, WHICH MEANS CAROLE MAKES FREQUENT TRIPS TO THE BANK TO AVOID HAVING LARGE SUMS OF MONEY AT THE RESTAURANT. IN 2013, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SEIZED CAROLE'S ENTIRE BANK ACCOUNT-TOTALING NEARLY $33,000-EVEN THOUGH SHE HAD DONE NOTHING WRONG. FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES BANKS TO REPORT CASH DEPOSITS LARGER THAN $10,000. SINCE CAROLE'S DEPOSITS WERE ALMOST ALWAYS LESS THAN $10,000, THE GOVERNMENT CLAIMED SHE WAS "STRUCTURING" HER BANK DEPOSITS TO EVADE THAT REPORTING REQUIREMENT AND USED CIVIL FORFEITURE TO SEIZE HER HARD-EARNED MONEY WITHOUT EVER EVEN CHARGING HER WITH A CRIME. WHEN CAROLE TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO FIGHT BACK, THE GOVERNMENT QUICKLY CAPITULATED AND AGREED TO DROP THE CASE AND RETURN CAROLE'S MONEY. BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT IS USING THIS PRACTICE WITH ALARMING FREQUENCY TO SEIZE THE CASH OF LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS, IJ IS FIGHTING BACK WITH A SERIES OF LAWSUITS DESCRIBED BELOW TO STOP THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRACTICE AND PROTECT THE PROPERTY AND EARNINGS OF HARD-WORKING AMERICANS. THUS FAR, WE HAVE BEEN AWARDED $1,538 IN COSTS RELATED TO THIS CASE. UNITED STATES V. $107,702.66 LYNDON MCLELLAN IS A CONVENIENCE STORE OWNER IN RURAL NORTH CAROLINA WHO HAD MORE THAN $107,000 SEIZED BY THE IRS IN 2014 USING CIVIL FORFEITURE UNDER FEDERAL STRUCTURING LAWS. SIMILAR TO CAROLE HINDERS ABOVE, LYNDON MADE FREQUENT CASH DEPOSITS SO AS NOT TO HAVE A LOT OF CASH ACCUMULATE IN THE STORE. BEFORE IJ GOT INVOLVED, LYNDON'S CASE WAS BROUGHT UP IN CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY, AND THE U.S ATTORNEY IN CHARGE OF THE CASE TOLD LYNDON'S LAWYER, "WHOEVER MADE [THE DOCUMENT] PUBLIC MAY SERVE THEIR OWN INTEREST BUT WILL NOT HELP THIS PARTICULAR CASE. MY OFFER IS TO RETURN 50% OF THE MONEY." RATHER THAN LETTING THE GOVERNMENT BULLY HIM, HOWEVER, LYNDON TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO FIGHT BACK. AND LESS THAN TWO WEEKS AFTER IJ ANNOUNCED OUR INVOLVEMENT, THE GOVERNMENT BACKED DOWN AND AGREED TO RETURN LYNDON'S MONEY. THESE LAWSUITS ARE SENDING A STRONG MESSAGE TO THE GOVERNMENT THAT IT CAN'T CONTINUE TO STEAL THE PROPERTY OF HONEST, HARD-WORKING AMERICANS. IN THE MATTER OF THE SEIZURE OF $446,651.11 FOR 27 YEARS, BROTHERS JEFF, RICHARD, AND MITCH HIRSCH HAVE OWNED BI-COUNTY DISTRIBUTORS, INC., A SMALL BUSINESS THAT DISTRIBUTES CANDY, SNACKS, AND OTHER GOODS TO CONVENIENCE STORES THROUGHOUT LONG ISLAND. BECAUSE BI-COUNTY'S CUSTOMERS OFTEN PAY IN CASH, THE HIRSCH BROTHERS FREQUENTLY MAKE LARGE DEPOSITS AT THEIR LOCAL BANK. IN 2012, WITHOUT CONDUCTING ANY SERIOUS INVESTIGATION INTO BI-COUNTY'S LEGITIMATE BUSINESS REASONS FOR MAKING SUCH DEPOSITS, THE GOVERNMENT RAIDED THEIR BANK ACCOUNT AND TOOK $446,651, SENDING THE COMPANY INTO A TAILSPIN AND UPENDING THE HIRSCH FAMILIES' LIVES. IJ FILED SUIT IN OCTOBER 2014, AND JUST TWO MONTHS LATER, THE GOVERNMENT AGREED TO RETURN THE MONEY AND NOT PURSUE FORFEITURE OF THE FUNDS. IT'S A SIGNIFICANT VICTORY NOT ONLY FOR THE HIRSCH BROTHERS, BUT FOR PROPERTY OWNERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY FIGHTING SIMILAR FORFEITURES OF THEIR PROPERTY AND CASH.
DEHKO V. HOLDER	THIS LAWSUIT IS A FOLLOW-UP TO OUR SUCCESSFUL REPRESENTATION OF MICHIGAN SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS MARK ZANIEWSKI AND TERRY DEHKO AND HIS DAUGHTER SANDY, WHO HAD THEIR ENTIRE BANK ACCOUNTS SEIZED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT USING CIVIL FORFEITURE UNDER FEDERAL STRUCTURING LAWS. THE GOVERNMENT NEVER CONVICTED THEM OF A CRIME, OR EVEN CHARGED THEM; IT SIMPLY ALLEGED THE DEPOSITS OF THEIR LAWFULLY EARNED MONEY WERE SUSPICIOUS. WE WERE ABLE TO SECURE THE RETURN OF MARK'S AND TERRY AND SANDY'S MONEY, AND WE FILED THIS FOLLOW-UP LAWSUIT AGAINST THE IRS TO ENSURE THAT PROPERTY OWNERS RECEIVE A PROMPT COURT HEARING WHEN FEDERAL AGENTS SEIZE THEIR PROPERTY THROUGH CIVIL FORFEITURE. UNITED STATES V. $11,000 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY AND CHARLES L. CLARKE, II THIS CASE ADDS YET ANOTHER DIMENSION TO OUR CAMPAIGN TO END CIVIL FORFEITURE, IN WHICH WE ADDRESS HEAD-ON THE NEW, BUT UNDERREPORTED, PRACTICE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGGRESSIVELY USING CIVIL FORFEITURE TO SEIZE CASH OF DOMESTIC TRAVELERS AT OUR NATION'S AIRPORTS. WE REPRESENT CHARLES CLARKE, A 24-YEAR-OLD STUDENT WHO HAD HIS ENTIRE LIFE SAVINGS OF $11,000 SEIZED AT THE CINCINNATI/NORTHERN KENTUCKY AIRPORT IN 2014. CHARLES IS FAR FROM THE ONLY PERSON WHOSE CASH HAS BEEN SEIZED-CINCINNATI AIRPORT POLICE TOOK PART IN NEARLY 100 SEIZURES TOTALING MORE THAN $2 MILLION IN 2013 ALONE. CARRYING LARGE AMOUNTS OF CASH IS NOT A CRIME, AND THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE TO PROVE THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED BEFORE IT CAN KEEP TRAVELERS' MONEY. SOUROVELIS V. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA IN PHILADELPHIA, WE ARE TAKING ON ONE OF THE WORST ABUSES OF CIVIL FORFEITURE LAWS IN THE NATION TODAY: THE CITY'S MACHINE-LIKE SYSTEM OF SEIZING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF PROPERTY FROM THOUSANDS OF ITS CITIZENS EACH YEAR. FORFEITURES RANGE FROM CASH, CARS, AND HOMES TO JUMPER CABLES. AND THE CITY'S POLICE AND PROSECUTORS GET TO KEEP ALL FORFEITURE PROCEEDS. OVER A 10-YEAR PERIOD PHILADELPHIA POLICE AND PROSECUTORS TOOK IN MORE THAN $64 MILLION IN FORFEITURE PROCEEDS, WITH $25 MILLION GOING TOWARD THEIR OWN SALARIES. SO IN AUGUST 2014, IJ FOUGHT BACK WITH A MAJOR FEDERAL LAWSUIT SEEKING TO END THE CITY'S SHOCKING PRACTICE ONCE AND FOR ALL. WE BROUGHT THE CASE AS A CLASS ACTION, SO A VICTORY WILL BENEFIT EVERYONE WHO FINDS THEMSELVES CAUGHT UP IN PHILADELPHIA'S FORFEITURE MACHINE. DEAN V. CITY OF WINONA THIS LAWSUIT TAKES ON A BAN ON THE NUMBER OF HOMEOWNERS WHO MAY RENT OUT THEIR PROPERTIES IN THE CITY OF WINONA, MINNESOTA. THE CITY AMENDED ITS ZONING LAWS SO THAT ONLY 30 PERCENT OF HOMES IN EACH BLOCK MAY RECEIVE A RENTAL PERMIT, WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR HOMEOWNERS TO RENT OUT THEIR HOMES. THAT MEANS IF 30 PERCENT OF HOMEOWNERS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE ALREADY SECURED RENTAL PERMITS, THE NEXT HOMEOWNER WHO SEEKS A PERMIT WILL BE TURNED AWAY EVEN IF HIS NEIGHBORS WITH PERMITS LIVE IN THEIR HOMES AND DON'T RENT THEM OUT. UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T ARBITRARILY RESTRICT THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF SOME PEOPLE BUT NOT OTHERS. A VICTORY IN THE CASE WILL SEND A MESSAGE TO CITIES ACROSS MINNESOTA AND NATIONWIDE THAT RENTAL BANS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND CITIES SHOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO IMPOSE THEM.
LIVE OAK BREWING V. TEXAS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE COMMISSION	BEFORE 2013, BEER DISTRIBUTORS IN TEXAS WOULD PAY BREWERS FOR THE RIGHT TO SELL THEIR BEER IN MARKETS LIKE HOUSTON OR AUSTIN, AND BREWERS TRADITIONALLY REINVESTED THIS MONEY INTO THEIR BREWERIES. BUT AT THE BEHEST OF POLITICALLY CONNECTED DISTRIBUTORS, TEXAS MADE IT ILLEGAL FOR BREWERS TO ACCEPT COMPENSATION FOR THEIR DISTRIBUTION RIGHTS. DISTRIBUTORS PAY NOTHING FOR SOMETHING POTENTIALLY WORTH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. TEXAS BREWERS ARE ESSENTIALLY BEING FORCED TO GIVE UP PART OF THEIR BUSINESS FOR FREE. THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION PROTECTS THE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND ECONOMIC LIBERTY OF ENTREPRENEURS, SO THE OWNERS OF THREE CRAFT BREWERIES TEAMED UP WITH IJ TO FIGHT BACK IN COURT, DEFEND THE BUSINESSES THEY BUILT, AND VINDICATE THESE IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES. DUNCAN V. NEW HAMPSHIRE THE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE'S WORK AS THE LAWYERS FOR THE SCHOOL CHOICE MOVEMENT HAS NEVER BEEN MORE IMPORTANT. SCHOOL CHOICE IS EXPANDING AT A RAPID PACE ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AND IJ IS EFFECTIVELY DEFENDING THE INTERESTS OF PARENTS AND CHILDREN WHEN CHOICE PROGRAMS ARE CHALLENGED IN COURT BY THE TEACHERS UNIONS AND THEIR ALLIES. IN AUGUST 2014, WE SECURED THE FIRST OF TWO STATE SUPREME COURT VICTORIES IN FY15 UPHOLDING SCHOOL CHOICE PROGRAMS WITH OUR VICTORY BEFORE THE NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT. UNDER THIS PROGRAM, LOCAL BUSINESSES CONTRIBUTE TO NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT FUND EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIPS. QUALIFYING PARENTS MAY USE THE SCHOLARSHIPS TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO A PRIVATE SCHOOL OR TO A TUITION-CHARGING PUBLIC SCHOOL IN A NEIGHBORING SCHOOL DISTRICT, OR TO PAY FOR HOMESCHOOLING EXPENSES. WITH THE STATE SUPREME COURT'S RULING, ELIGIBLE FAMILIES NOW ARE ABLE TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO WHATEVER SCHOOL THEY CHOOSE. BOYD V. MAGEE OUR SECOND STATE SUPREME COURT VICTORY FOR SCHOOL CHOICE THIS YEAR CAME IN MARCH, WHEN THE ALABAMA SUPREME COURT RULED THAT THE ALABAMA ACCOUNTABILITY ACT IS ENTIRELY CONSTITUTIONAL. THE ACT HAS BEEN A LIFELINE FOR OUR CLIENTS AND OTHER PARENTS TRYING TO RESCUE THEIR CHILDREN FROM FAILING PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THE TEACHERS UNIONS AND THEIR ALLIES, HOWEVER, FEARED THAT THE TAX CREDITS AND SCHOLARSHIPS THE STATE OFFERS PARENTS TO SECURE A QUALITY EDUCATION FOR THEIR CHILDREN WOULD END THE PUBLIC SCHOOL MONOPOLY. SO THEY DESPERATELY THREW 10 DIFFERENT LEGAL CHALLENGES AT ALABAMA'S SCHOOL CHOICE PROGRAMS IN THE HOPES THAT AT LEAST ONE WOULD STICK. BUT THE STATE SUPREME COURT ROUNDLY REJECTED EACH OF THEIR CLAIMS, DEFINITIVELY STATING THAT SCHOOL CHOICE IS CONSTITUTIONAL IN ALABAMA. THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN ALREADY BENEFIT FROM ALABAMA'S PROGRAMS, AND THIS DECISION OPENS THE DOOR FOR EVEN MORE FAMILIES TO JOIN THEIR RANKS. LARUE V. COLORADO BOARD OF EDUCATION IJ APPEARED BEFORE TWO OTHER STATE SUPREME COURTS THIS YEAR DEFENDING SCHOOL CHOICE. IN DECEMBER 2014, WE APPEARED BEFORE THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT TO VINDICATE A MODEST LOCAL SCHOOL CHOICE PROGRAM IN DOUGLAS COUNTY THAT PROVIDES PRIVATE SCHOOL SCHOLARSHIPS TO DISTRICT RESIDENTS. THE ACLU, AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, AND SEVERAL COLORADO ORGANIZATIONS AND TAXPAYERS SUED TO STOP THE PROGRAM. IJ INTERVENED, REPRESENTING FOUR FAMILIES WHO INTEND TO USE THE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR THEIR CHILDREN.
HART V. STATE/RICHARDSON V. STATE	IN FEBRUARY 2015, WE APPEARED BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT DEFENDING THE STATE'S OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM, WHICH AWARDS PUBLICLY FUNDED SCHOLARSHIPS TO ENABLE QUALIFYING FAMILIES TO TAKE THEIR CHILDREN OUT OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM AND SEND THEM TO A PRIVATE SCHOOL. THE TEACHERS UNIONS AND SCHOOL BOARDS FILED TWO SEPARATE LAWSUITS TO STOP THE PROGRAM ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE NORTH CAROLINA CONSTITUTION PREVENTS THE STATE FROM FUNDING ANY PRIVATE SCHOOL SCHOLARSHIPS. HOWEVER, THE STATE CONSTITUTION ALLOWS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO USE ITS GENERAL REVENUE FUND TO CREATE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS OUTSIDE OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT NORTH CAROLINA LEGISLATORS DID THROUGH THE OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM. WE INTERVENED IN THE CASE ON BEHALF OF CYNTHIA PERRY AND OTHER PARENTS WHO WISH TO USE THE PROGRAM TO SAVE THEIR CHILDREN FROM FAILING PUBLIC SCHOOLS. GADDY V. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE IN MAY 2014, WE INTERVENED IN A LAWSUIT TO DEFEND GEORGIA'S LONG-STANDING SCHOLARSHIP TAX-CREDIT PROGRAM. THE PROGRAM PROVIDES SCHOLARSHIPS TO MORE THAN 13,000 STUDENTS, MAKING IT THE FOURTH LARGEST SCHOOL CHOICE PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY. OUR OPPONENTS ARE CHALLENGING THE PROGRAM ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT VIOLATES THE STATE CONSTITUTION'S BAN ON PROVIDING PUBLIC SUPPORT TO RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND THAT THE LEGISLATURE IS LIMITED TO SUPPORTING ONLY THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. HOWEVER, THEIR CLAIMS LACK MERIT AS 100 PERCENT OF THE PROGRAM FUNDS ARE RAISED FROM PRIVATE DONORS AND GIVEN TO PARENTS TO SPEND AT A SCHOOL OF THEIR CHOICE-REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY CHOOSE A RELIGIOUS OR NON-RELIGIOUS PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR THEIR CHILDREN. GEORGIA'S SCHOLARSHIP TAX-CREDIT PROGRAM OFFERS THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN A PATHWAY TO A BETTER EDUCATION TODAY, NOT AT SOME DISTANT POINT IN THE FUTURE, AND WE WILL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO ENSURE THAT IT CONTINUES TO SUCCEED. CITIZENS FOR STRONG SCHOOLS V. FLORIDA IN FLORIDA, WE INTERVENED ON BEHALF OF SIX FAMILIES TO DEFEND TWO OF THE LARGEST SCHOOL CHOICE PROGRAMS IN THE NATION. THE MCKAY SCHOLARSHIP FOR PUPILS WITH DISABILITIES AND THE FLORIDA CORPORATE TAX CREDIT SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM HAVE BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR OVER A DECADE AND HELP MORE THAN 87,000 CHILDREN ACROSS THE STATE OBTAIN A QUALITY EDUCATION. THE PROGRAMS CAME UNDER ATTACK IN 2014 WHEN A GROUP OF PARENTS WHO SUED FLORIDA SEVERAL YEARS AGO SEEKING MORE MONEY FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION AMENDED THEIR LAWSUIT TO CHALLENGE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THESE TWO PROGRAMS, CLAIMING THEY UNCONSTITUTIONALLY "DIVERT" MONEY FROM FLORIDA'S PUBLIC SCHOOLS. BUT OUR OPPONENTS' CLAIMS ARE UNFOUNDED, AND WE WILL PROVE THE PROGRAMS' CONSTITUTIONALITY IN COURT AND DEMONSTRATE THE POWER OF SCHOOL CHOICE TO TRANSFORM INDIVIDUAL LIVES AND IMPROVE THE OVERALL PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM. AMICUS IN ADDITION TO LITIGATING THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED CASES, THE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE FILED AMICUS BRIEFS IN THE FOLLOWING CASES BETWEEN JULY 1, 2014 AND JUNE 30, 2015: CITY OF LOS ANGELES V. PATEL HENDERSON V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HORNE V. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF DENTAL EXAMINERS V. FTC OBERGEFELL V. HODGES REED V. TOWN OF GILBERT, ARIZONA ROWELL V. PETTIJOHN SERAFINE V. BRANAMAN WOLLSCHLAEGER V. GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA UTTER V. BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.

Cat. No. 51056K

Schedule O (Form 990 or 990-EZ) 2014

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

1	Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities: TO PROTECT THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF AMERICANS.
2	Check this box
3	Number of voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1a) ........	3	10
4	Number of independent voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1b) .....	4	9
5	Total number of individuals employed in calendar year 2014 (Part V, line 2a) ......	5	118
6	Total number of volunteers (estimate if necessary) .............	6	50
7a	Total unrelated business revenue from Part VIII, column (C), line 12 ........	7a	0
b	Net unrelated business taxable income from Form 990-T, line 34 .........	7b	0

		Prior Year	Current Year
8	Contributions and grants (Part VIII, line 1h) .........	23,917,519	30,397,072
9	Program service revenue (Part VIII, line 2g) .........	514,651	3,394,895
10	Investment income (Part VIII, column (A), lines 3, 4, and 7d ) ....	181,417	244,368
11	Other revenue (Part VIII, column (A), lines 5, 6d, 8c, 9c, 10c, and 11e)	0	87,588
12	Total revenue—add lines 8 through 11 (must equal Part VIII, column (A), line 12)...................	24,613,587	34,123,923
13	Grants and similar amounts paid (Part IX, column (A), lines 1–3 )...	0	0
14	Benefits paid to or for members (Part IX, column (A), line 4).....	0	0
15	Salaries, other compensation, employee benefits (Part IX, column (A), lines 5–10)	9,545,871	12,713,903
16a	Professional fundraising fees (Part IX, column (A), line 11e).....	0	0
b	Total fundraising expenses (Part IX, column (D), line 25) 1,217,399
17	Other expenses (Part IX, column (A), lines 11a–11d, 11f–24e)....	4,542,454	5,395,138
18	Total expenses. Add lines 13–17 (must equal Part IX, column (A), line 25)	14,088,325	18,109,041
19	Revenue less expenses. Subtract line 18 from line 12.......	10,525,262	16,014,882
		Beginning of Current Year	End of Year
20	Total assets (Part X, line 16).............	54,270,467	73,113,753
21	Total liabilities (Part X, line 26).............	1,025,842	3,970,681
22	Net assets or fund balances. Subtract line 21 from line 20.....	53,244,625	69,143,072

Sign Here

	Signature of officer	Date

	Type or print name and title


4a	(Code: ) (Expenses $ 15,027,036 including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ 3,394,895 )
	TO PROTECT THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF AMERICANS THROUGH LITIGATION; EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ABOUT ISSUES VITAL TO LIBERTY THROUGH MEDIA RELATIONS AND OUTREACH EVENTS; TRAIN LAWYERS AND STUDENTS TO PRESERVE CIVIL LIBERTIES.SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A LIST OF CASES IN LITIGATION.

4b	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4c	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4d	Other program services (Describe in Schedule O.)
	(Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )
4e	Total program service expenses15,027,036

1b	Sub-Total................
c	Total from continuation sheets to Part VII, Section A....
d	Total (add lines 1b and 1c)............	2,638,489	0	2,043,766

(A) Name and Title	(B) Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)		(D) Reportable compensation from the organization (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(E) Reportable compensation from related organizations (W- 2/1099-MISC)	(F) Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations
(A) Name and Title
(18) ROBERT GALL........................................................................ SENIOR ATTORNEY	40.00 .......................	X	195,862	0	36,938
(19) JEFFREY ROWES........................................................................ SENIOR ATTORNEY	40.00 .......................	X	202,361	0	36,926
(20) RICHARD KOMER........................................................................ SENIOR ATTORNEY	40.00 .......................	X	179,422	0	29,602

(A) Name and business address	(B) Description of services	(C) Compensation
APPLIED INTELLIGENCE GROUP 5005 N 14TH STREET ARLINGTON,VA22205	IT CONSULTING	172,245




2 Total number of independent contractors (including but not limited to those listed above) who received more than $100,000 of compensation from the organization 1

				(A) Total revenue	(B) Related or exempt function revenue	(C) Unrelated business revenue	(D) Revenue excluded from tax under sections 512-514
1a	Federated campaigns..1a
b	Membership dues....1b
c	Fundraising events....1c
d	Related organizations...1d
e	Government grants (contributions)1e

f	All other contributions, gifts, grants, and similar amounts not included above1f		30,397,072

g	Noncash contributions included in lines 1a-1f:$		1,020,165
h	Total. Add lines 1a-1f.......			30,397,072
			Business Code
2a	ATTORNEY FEES		541100	3,364,644	3,364,644
b	MISCELLANEOUS		900099	23,401	23,401
c	HONORARIA		900099	6,850	6,850
d
e
f	All other program service revenue .
g	Total. Add lines 2a–2f........			3,394,895
3	Investment income (including dividends, interest, and other similar amounts).......			242,995			242,995
4	Income from investment of tax-exempt bond proceeds..
5	Royalties...........
		(i) Real	(ii) Personal
6a	Gross rents	87,588
b	Less: rental expenses	0
c	Rental income or (loss)	87,588
d	Net rental income or (loss).......			87,588			87,588
		(i) Securities	(ii) Other
7a	Gross amount from sales of assets other than inventory	11,385,129	82,272
b	Less: cost or other basis and sales expenses	11,383,201	82,827
c	Gain or (loss)	1,928	-555
d	Net gain or (loss)..........			1,373			1,373
8a	Gross income from fundraising events (not including $ of contributions reported on line 1c). See Part IV, line 18 ..
	a
b	Less: direct expenses ...b
c	Net income or (loss) from fundraising events..
9a	Gross income from gaming activities. See Part IV, line 19 ...
	a
b	Less: direct expenses ...b
c	Net income or (loss) from gaming activities...
10a	Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances .
	a
b	Less: cost of goods sold ..b
c	Net income or (loss) from sales of inventory..
Miscellaneous Revenue			Business Code
11a
b
c
d	All other revenue ....
e	Total. Add lines 11a–11d ......
12	Total revenue. See Instructions......			34,123,923	3,394,895	0	331,956


				(A) Beginning of year		(B) End of year
1	Cash–non-interest-bearing .............			1,400	1	1,000
2	Savings and temporary cash investments .........			24,339,803	2	25,737,895
3	Pledges and grants receivable, net ...........			3,646,257	3	7,385,729
4	Accounts receivable, net .............			12,097	4	2,683,868
5	Loans and other receivables from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and highest compensated employees. Complete Part II of Schedule L ..................
					5
6	Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B), and contributing employers and sponsoring organizations of section 501(c)(9) voluntary employees' beneficiary organizations (see instructions) Complete Part II of Schedule L
					6
7	Notes and loans receivable, net .............				7
8	Inventories for sale or use ..............				8
9	Prepaid expenses and deferred charges ..........			230,055	9	250,224
10a	Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D	10a	3,926,632
b	Less: accumulated depreciation .....	10b	2,639,192	758,646	10c	1,287,440
11	Investments—publicly traded securities ..........			20,156,625	11	29,806,756
12	Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 .....			4,960,861	12	5,761,061
13	Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 .....				13
14	Intangible assets ...............				14
15	Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 ...........			164,723	15	199,780
16	Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 34)......			54,270,467	16	73,113,753
17	Accounts payable and accrued expenses .........			739,393	17	2,405,167
18	Grants payable .................				18
19	Deferred revenue ................			25,137	19	0
20	Tax-exempt bond liabilities .............				20
21	Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D..				21
22	Loans and other payables to current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, highest compensated employees, and disqualified
	persons. Complete Part II of Schedule L..........				22
23	Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties ..				23
24	Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties ....				24
25	Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17-24). Complete Part X of Schedule D....................			261,312	25	1,565,514
26	Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25.........			1,025,842	26	3,970,681
	Organizations that follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 27 through 29, and lines 33 and 34.
27	Unrestricted net assets ..............			49,103,431	27	60,337,444
28	Temporarily restricted net assets ...........			4,141,194	28	8,705,628
29	Permanently restricted net assets ...........				29	100,000
	Organizations that do not follow SFAS 117 (ASC 958), check here and complete lines 30 through 34.
30	Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds ........				30
31	Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building or equipment fund .....				31
32	Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds				32
33	Total net assets or fund balances ...........			53,244,625	33	69,143,072
34	Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances ........			54,270,467	34	73,113,753

1	Was the organization a U.S. transferor of property to a foreign corporation during the tax year? If "Yes,"the organization may be required to file Form 926, Return by a U.S. Transferor of Property to a Foreign Corporation (see Instructions for Form 926)......................................	Yes	No
2	Did the organization have an interest in a foreign trust during the tax year? If "Yes," the organization may be required to file Form 3520, Annual Return to Report Transactions with Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts, and/or Form 3520-A, Annual Information Return of Foreign Trust With a U.S. Owner (see Instructions for Forms 3520 and 3520-A; do not file with Form 990)............................	Yes	No
3	Did the organization have an ownership interest in a foreign corporation during the tax year? If "Yes," the organization may be required to file Form 5471, Information Return of U.S. Persons with Respect to Certain Foreign Corporations. (see Instructions for Form 5471)..............................	Yes	No
4	Was the organization a direct or indirect shareholder of a passive foreign investment company or a qualified electing fund during the tax year? If “Yes,” the organization may be required to file Form 8621, Information Return by a Shareholder of a Passive Foreign Investment Company or Qualified Electing Fund. (see Instructions for Form 8621)...............................................	Yes	No
5	Did the organization have an ownership interest in a foreign partnership during the tax year? If "Yes," the organization may be required to file Form 8865, Return of U.S. Persons with Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships. (see Instructions for Form 8865)....................................	Yes	No
6	Did the organization have any operations in or related to any boycotting countries during the tax year? If "Yes," the organization may be required to file Form 5713, International Boycott Report (see Instructions for Form 5713; do not file with Form 990).....................................	Yes	No