Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.
Go to
www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.
| (i) Name of supported organization | (ii) EIN | (iii) Type of organization (described on lines 1- 10 above (see instructions)) | (iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document? | (v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions) | (vi) Amount of other support (see instructions) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||||
|
Total |
||||||
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2015 | (b) 2016 | (c) 2017 | (d) 2018 | (e) 2019 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grant.") .. | 4,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 58,500 |
| 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 | 4,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 58,500 |
| 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).. | 21,330 | |||||
| 6 | Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4. | 37,170 | |||||
Calendar year
(or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2015 | (b) 2016 | (c) 2017 | (d) 2018 | (e) 2019 | (f) Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Amounts from line 4.. | 4,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 13,500 | 58,500 |
| 8 | Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources... | ||||||
| 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 | 58,500 | |||||
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2015 | (b) 2016 | (c) 2017 | (d) 2018 | (e) 2019 | (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.) | ||||||
Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in) ![]() |
(a) 2015 | (b) 2016 | (c) 2017 | (d) 2018 | (e) 2019 | (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.).. | ||||||
| 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 | ||||
| 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 2019 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-2019 |
(iii) Distributable Amount for 2019 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Distributable amount for 2019 from Section C, line 6 | ||||
|
2
Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2019 (reasonable cause required-- explain in Part VI). See instructions. |
||||
| 3 Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2019: | ||||
| a From 2014....... | ||||
| b From 2015....... | ||||
| c From 2016....... | ||||
| d From 2017....... | ||||
| e From 2018....... | ||||
| fTotal of lines 3a through e | ||||
| g Applied to underdistributions of prior years | ||||
| h Applied to 2019 distributable amount | ||||
|
i
Carryover from 2014 not applied (see instructions) |
||||
| j Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from 3f. | ||||
| 4Distributions for 2019 from Section D, line 7: | ||||
| $ | ||||
| a Applied to underdistributions of prior years | ||||
| b Applied to 2019 distributable amount | ||||
| c Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from 4. | ||||
|
5
Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2019, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. |
||||
|
6
Remaining underdistributions for 2019. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions. |
||||
|
7 Excess distributions carryover to 2020. Add lines 3j and 4c. |
||||
| 8 Breakdown of line 7: | ||||
| a Excess from 2015..... | ||||
| b Excess from 2016..... | ||||
| c Excess from 2017..... | ||||
| d Excess from 2018..... | ||||
| e Excess from 2019..... | ||||
| Facts And Circumstances Test |
|---|
| Return Reference | Explanation |
|---|
| Software ID: | |
| Software Version: |
Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for the latest information.
| Return Reference | Explanation |
|---|---|
| FORM 990-EZ, PART I, LINE 16 - OTHER EXPENSES | DESCRIPTION: LITIGATION ACTIVITIES. AMOUNT: 4,486. DESCRIPTION: LEGAL DEFENSE INFORMATION SERVICES AND REPORTS. AMOUNT: 2,500. DESCRIPTION: MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL OPERATING EXPENSES. AMOUNT: 2,889. TOTAL TO FORM 990-EZ, LINE 16: 9,875. |
| PART III, LINE 28 | A. - THE FUND IS SERVING AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SAN FRANCISCO V. AZAR, CONSOLIDATED CASES IN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, JOINING IN A BRIEF FILED ON JUNE 22, 2020. THE CASE SEEKS TO UPHOLD REGULATIONS PROMULGATED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES TO IMPLEMENT FEDERAL LAWS PROTECTING THE CONSCIENCE RIGHTS OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS WANTING NO PART IN THE PERFORMING OF ABORTIONS OR STERILIZATIONS, AMONG OTHER MEDICAL PROCEDURES, AND TO PROTECT THEM FROM DISCRIMINATION FOR THEIR REFUSAL TO PERFORM THEM. U.S. DISTRICT COURTS IN CALIFORNIA AND THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STRUCK DOWN THE REGULATIONS. B. - THE FUND IS ALSO SERVING AS AMICUS CURIAE IN NEW YORK STATE V. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, CONSOLIDATED CASES IN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, JOINING IN A BRIEF FILED ON MAY 26, 2020. THE CASE IS SIMILAR TO SAN FRANCISCO V. AZAR, DISCUSSED ABOVE. BRIEFING IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING COMPLETED. C. - THE FUND IS SERVING AS AMICUS CURIAE IN COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA V. FERRIERO, IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, IN WHICH VIRGINIA, ILLINOIS, AND NEVADA CLAIM TO BE THE 36TH , 37TH , AND 38TH STATES TO RATIFY THE LONG SINCE EXPIRED EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT (ERA) AND SEEK TO FORCE THE NATIONAL ARCHIVIST TO CERTIFY THE ERA AS THE TWENTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. THE AMICUS BRIEF OPPOSES THIS ATTEMPT TO JUDICIALLY IMPOSE THE ERA, WHICH DID NOT MAKE IT THROUGH THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROCESS BEFORE IT EXPIRED UNDER THE TIME LIMIT IMPOSED BY CONGRESS FOR THE STATES TO RATIFY IT. (ONE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT CONCLUDED THE ERA DIED ON MARCH 22, 1979. SEE IDAHO V. FREEMAN, 529 F. SUPP. 1107, 1154 (D. ID. 1981), VACATED AS MOOT 459 U.S. 809 (1982).) ON JUNE 12, 2020, THE DISTRICT COURT ALLOWED FIVE STATES (ALABAMA, LOUISIANA, NEBRASKA, SOUTH DAKOTA, AND TENNESSEE) TO INTERVENE AS DEFENDANTS TO ARGUE AGAINST RATIFICATION. D. - THE FUND SERVED AS AMICUS CURIAE IN NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR GUN RIGHTS, INC. V. MANGAN IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, JOINING IN A BRIEF FILED ON JANUARY 15, 2020. THE CASE CHALLENGED A MONTANA CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW WHICH RESTRICTS BROAD CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATIONS WHICH EVEN MENTION AN ELECTED OFFICIAL SEEKING RE-ELECTION FOR ABOUT ONE-HALF OF EVERY ELECTION YEAR. THROUGH THIS LAW, MONTANA TOOK THE FEDERAL TERM "ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION AND APPLIED IT TO PURE "ISSUE ADVOCACY," BLURRING THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THESE CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION THAT HAS EXISTED FOR MANY YEARS. UNFORTUNATELY, THE SUPREME COURT DECLINED TO TAKE THE CASE, DENYING THE PETITION FOR CERTIORARI ON JUNE 1, 2020, AND ENDING THE CASE. E. - THE FUND SERVED AS AMICUS CURIAE IN AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION V. XAVIER BECERRA IN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, JOINING IN A BRIEF FILED ON JANUARY 27, 2017. AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION (APF) SUED THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL (AG) IN AN "AS APPLIED" CHALLENGE TO THE REQUIREMENT TO FILE UNREDACTED COPIES OF IRS SCHEDULE B WITH THE AG AS A PRECONDITION TO FUNDRAISING IN THE STATE. THIS WOULD REQUIRE DISCLOSURE OF APF'S MAJOR DONORS' NAMES AND ADDRESSES TO THE CALIFORNIA AG, WHICH APF CONTENDS WOULD VIOLATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT OF ITS DONORS TO SUPPORT IT ANONYMOUSLY. THE DISTRICT COURT AGREED WITH APF AND ENTERED A PERMANENT INJUNCTION PROHIBITING THE AG FROM DEMANDING UNREDACTED SCHEDULE BS FROM APF, LEADING TO THE APPEAL. UNFORTUNATELY, ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2018, THE COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED THE DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT AND REMANDED THE CASE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE CALIFORNIA AG. AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION V. BECERRA, 903 F.3D 1000 (2018). ON SEPTEMBER 25TH, AFP FILED A PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC, WHICH AS DENIED ON MARCH 29, 2019 (919 F.3D 1177). APF FILED A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI WITH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ON AUGUST 26, 2019, AND THE FUND JOINED IN AN AMICUS BRIEF FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT ON SEPTEMBER 25, 2019. ON FEBRUARY 24, 2020, THE SUPREME COURT INVITED THE U.S. SOLICITOR GENERAL TO FILE A BRIEF IN THE CASE EXPRESSING THE VIEWS OF THE UNITED STATES. THAT BRIEF HAS NOT YET BEEN FILED, AND THERE HAS BEEN NO FURTHER ACTION IN THE CASE. F. - IN 2014, THE FUND FINANCED THE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF PROMINENT D.C. LAWYER AND NONPROFIT EXPERT CHARLES M. WATKINS IN CENTER FOR COMPETITIVE POLITICS V. KAMALA D. HARRIS, THEN ON APPEAL TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT (NO. 14-15978). HARRIS WAS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (AG) OF CALIFORNIA. CALIFORNIA REQUIRES CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS TO REGISTER AND FILE REPORTS IN ORDER TO SOLICIT CONTRIBUTIONS IN THE STATE. ONE OF THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS IS IRS FORM 990, WHICH THE CENTER HAS FILED WITH ONE EXCEPTION: IT REDACTED THE NAMES OF ITS DONORS LISTED ON SCHEDULE B, AS ADVISED BY THE IRS, OUT OF CONCERN THAT CALIFORNIA WOULD, EITHER SUA SPONTE OR IN RESPONSE TO A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST, MAKE THE DONORS' IDENTITIES PUBLIC. (SCHEDULE B IDENTIFIES A CHARITY'S LARGEST DONORS. THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE PROTECTS THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF DONOR INFORMATION ON SCHEDULE B AND ALLOWS CHARITIES TO REDACT SUCH INFORMATION WHEN PROVIDING SCHEDULE B IN RESPONSE TO PUBLIC REQUESTS.) DONOR IDENTITIES HAVE LONG BEEN PROTECTED OUT OF CONCERN THAT FORCING PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WOULD DRIVE DONORS AWAY AND CHILL THE RIGHT OF DONORS AND ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS TO ASSOCIATE AND PROMOTE CAUSES UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. THIS WAS ARTICULATED BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN THE LANDMARK NAACP V. ALABAMA, 357 U.S. 449, 462 (1958) ("IT IS HARDLY A NOVEL PERCEPTION THAT COMPELLED DISCLOSURE OF AFFILIATION WITH GROUPS ENGAGED IN ADVOCACY MAY CONSTITUTE . . . A RESTRAINT ON FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION . . . ."). (A RECENT EXAMPLE IS THE FORCED RESIGNATION OF MOZILLA CEO BRENDAN EICH JUST DAYS AFTER HIS APPOINTMENT, IN RESPONSE TO A CAMPAIGN AGAINST HIM FOR SUPPORTING CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 8, WHICH LED TO HIS CONTRIBUTION BEING DISCLOSED ON A CALIFORNIA INITIATIVE CAMPAIGN REPORT. "MOZILLA CEO BRENDAN EICH RESIGNS UNDER FIRE FOR SUPPORTING PROP. 8," LOS ANGELES TIMES, APRIL 3, 2014, AVAILABLE AT HTTP://ARTICLES.LATIMES.COM/2014/APR/03/BUSINESS/LA-FI-TN-MOZILLA-CEO-RE SIGNS-UNDER-FIRE-PROP-8-20 140403, VISITED ON 1/21/20.) AG HARRIS ATTEMPTED TO JUSTIFY HER DEMAND BY CLAIMING THAT HER OFFICE NEEDED THE DONOR INFORMATION TO FERRET OUT INSIDER FINANCIAL ABUSE OF CHARITIES, AMONG OTHER THINGS. WATKINS COUNTERED THAT OTHER PUBLIC INFORMATION ON THE 990, E.G., INFORMATION ABOUT OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, AND KEY EMPLOYEES, IS FAR MORE RELEVANT WITH RESPECT TO SUCH ISSUES BECAUSE THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE THE TRUE INSIDERS. DONORS ARE NOT. WHOLESALE GATHERING OF DONOR INFORMATION FROM ORGANIZATIONS NOT SUSPECTED OF ANY WRONGDOING IS NOT THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS FOR ACCOMPLISHING THE AG'S ASSERTED GOALS. IN ADDITION, OTHER STATES DO NOT REQUIRE SCHEDULE B, AND SOME EVEN CAUTION ORGANIZATIONS NOT TO SUBMIT IT, OR IT WILL BECOME PUBLIC UNDER THEIR PUBLIC INFORMATION LAWS. IN SHORT, THE CALIFORNIA AG FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT REQUIRING CHARITIES TO FILE THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THEIR LARGEST DONORS IS THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE MEANS OF CARRYING OUT HER DUTIES, AND THE RIGHT TO ASSOCIATE ANONYMOUSLY SHOULD PREVAIL. |
| 990-EZ, PART III, LINE 28 | F (CONT'D) - THE CENTER SOUGHT A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WHICH WAS DENIED. THE CENTER APPEALED TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, WHICH UPHELD THE DISTRICT COURT DECISION. THE CENTER THEN PETITIONED THE U.S. SUPREME COURT FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI. THE FUND SERVED AS AN AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION WITH A BRIEF FILED ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2015. THE PETITION WAS DENIED ON NOVEMBER 9, 2015. ON AUGUST 12, 2016, THE CENTER FILED AN AMENDED COMPLAINT SEEKING A DECLARATION THAT THE AG'S DEMAND FOR SCHEDULE B VIOLATES, INTER ALIA, THE FIRST, FOURTH, AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS, AND SEEKING THE ENTRY OF A PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THE AG FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS, WHICH WAS FULLY BRIEFED ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2016. MEANWHILE, ON JANUARY 25, 2016, THE FUND JOINED IN COMMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CHARITABLE TRUSTS SECTION IN RESPONSE TO ITS NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING ON DONOR CONFIDENTIALITY, REGARDING THE SAME ISSUES BEING LITIGATED IN THE FEDERAL COURTS. THE AG'S OFFICE WAS ATTEMPTING TO CREATE A REGULATION JUSTIFYING ITS UNCONSTITUTIONAL DEMANDS FOR SCHEDULE B. ON OCTOBER 31, 2017, THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GRANTED THE AG'S MOTION AND DISMISSED THE CASE (296 F.SUPP. 3D 1219). THE CENTER (NOW NAMED THE INSTITUTE FOR FREE SPEECH (IFS)) FILED AN APPEAL WITH THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNDER THE NAME INSTITUTE FOR FREE SPEECH V. BECERRA (NO. 17-17403). THE FUND SUPPORTED AN AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF FILED IN SUPPORT OF IFS ON MARCH 16, 2018. THE CALIFORNIA AG MOVED FOR SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE, WHICH WAS GRANTED ON OCTOBER 11, 2019. IFS FILED A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI WITH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ON DECEMBER 18, 2019. THE CALIFORNIA AG FILED A WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO RESPOND, BUT THE SUPREME COURT ASKED THE AG TO FILE A BRIEF, WHICH THE AG DID ON MAY 1, 2020. IFS FILED ITS REPLY BRIEF ON MAY 15, 2020. NO FURTHER ACTION HAS OCCURRED. G. - THE FUND IS SERVING AS AMICUS CURIAE IN CROSSROADS GRASSROOTS POLICY STRATEGIES V. CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON (CREW), IN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT, IN SUPPORT OF A THIRTY-SEVEN YEAR OLD FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION REGULATION THAT REQUIRES THE DISCLOSURE OF DONORS TO NONPROFIT CORPORATIONS WHO CONTRIBUTE TO THE SUPPORT OF A PARTICULAR INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE BUT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE DISCLOSURE OF OTHER DONORS. TYPICALLY, COURTS DEFER TO AGENCY "EXPERTISE" IN SUCH MATTERS, FOLLOWING CHEVRON U.S.A., INC. V. NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), BUT IN THIS POLITICALLY-CHARGED CASE, ON AUGUST 3, 2018, THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STRUCK DOWN THE FEC REGULATION (316 F.SUPP.3D 349), THUS PUTTING THE IDENTITIES OF MANY MORE DONORS AT RISK OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE IN FILINGS WITH THE FEC, IN VIOLATION OF THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ASSOCIATE ANONYMOUSLY WITH CROSSROADS. UNFORTUNATELY, ON AUGUST 21, 2020, THE COURT OF APPEALS UPHELD THE DISTRICT COURT'S DECISION. CROSSROADS HAS 90 DAYS TO SEEK U.S. SUPREME COURT REVIEW. H. - THE FUND SERVED AS AMICUS CURIAE IN VERONICA PRICE ET AL. V. CITY OF CHICAGO, SUPPORTING PRICE'S PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. THE CASE INVOLVES A CHICAGO PUBLIC SIDEWALK REGULATION CONSTRICTING PRO-LIFE PETITIONERS' EDUCATION AND COUNSELING ACTIVITIES. THE AMICUS BRIEF, FILED WITH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ON JULY 8, 2019, ARGUES THAT THE ORDINANCE IS A CONTENT-BASED RESTRICTION ON THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN VIOLATION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT, BUT THAT FIRST AMENDMENT JURISPRUDENCE HAS BEEN CORRUPTED AND DISTORTED BY THE EFFECT OF ABORTION DECISIONS, AND THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD TAKE THE CASE TO REINVIGORATE PURE FIRST AMENDMENT PRINCIPLES. THE CITY OF CHICAGO FILED ITS BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO THE PETITION ON AUGUST 7, 2019, TO WHICH PRICE REPLIED ON AUGUST 21, 2019. UNFORTUNATELY, THE SUPREME COURT DENIED THE PETITION ON JULY 2, 2020. I. - THE FUND CONTINUES TO MONITOR DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREAS OF FIRST AMENDMENT, CAMPAIGN FINANCE, AND OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES WITH A VIEW TOWARD PARTICIPATING IN OR SUPPORTING ADDITIONAL LITIGATION WHEN THE OPPORTUNITY ARISES. |
| Software ID: | |
| Software Version: |