Free Speech For People, et al. v. FEC (22-666)

On August 1, 2024, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted the Commission’s motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Free Speech for People and Campaign for Accountability (Plaintiffs).

Background

On December 16, 2016, Plaintiffs filed an administrative complaint with the FEC against the Government of the Russian Federation (“Russian Federation”) and Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. (“Trump Campaign”), alleging violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) during the 2016 presidential election. The complaint alleged that the Russian Federation sought to influence the 2016 presidential election by paying hackers to breach Democratic National Committee servers and leak the hacked information; paying individuals to make social media posts; and paying for political advertisements. The complaint also alleged that the Russian Federation did not disclose any of the spending and that some of its political spending was “coordinated” with the Trump Campaign.

On April 22, 2021, the Commission voted 3-3 on whether to find reason to believe that either the Russian Federation or the Trump Campaign had violated FECA. The Commission then voted 4-2 and 3-3 on separate motions to dismiss the claims against the Russian Federation and the Trump Campaign, respectively, based on prosecutorial discretion. Finally, the Commission voted 6-0 to close the file as to both respondents.

On March 10, 2022, Plaintiffs initiated a lawsuit against the FEC, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief that the Commission’s dismissal of Plaintiffs’ complaint was “contrary to law.”

Analysis

The FEC moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint, arguing that the controlling commissioners appropriately dismissed the administrative complaint based on prosecutorial discretion, rendering the agency’s decision judicially unreviewable. The controlling commissioners explained that the investigation would face legal obstacles, lengthen an unfeasibly short timeline, expend limited and costly resources, and only minimally benefit the public because of the duplicative nature of the investigation. The court determined that these reasons were appropriate considerations when determining whether to assert prosecutorial discretion.

Accordingly, the court determined that FEC’s dismissal in this case was an exercise of the agency’s prosecutorial discretion and was not judicially reviewable under controlling D.C. Circuit precedent.

Source: FEC Record — August 2024; March 2022

District Court (DC)

Court decisions:

• Memorandum Opinion (08/01/2024)
• Order (08/01/2024)

Related documents:

• Defendant Federal Election Commission's Reply Memorandum in Support of Its Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (09/22/2022)
• Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant Federal Election Commission's Motion to Dismiss (08/25/2022)
• Defendant Federal Election Commission's Motion to Dismiss (06/03/2022)
• Defendant Federal Election Commission's Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (06/03/2022)
• Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (03/10/2022)