Free and Fair Election Fund et al v. Missouri Ethics Commission et al
Filing
93
AMENDED CLERK'S JUDGMENT (Matthes Mitra, Renea)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
CENTRAL DIVISION
FREE AND FAIR ELECTION
FUND, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
MISSOURI ETHICS
COMMISSION, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 16-04332-CV-C-ODS
AMENDED JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
___
Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury.
X
Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court.
The issues have been determined and a decision has been made.
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Amended Order, Doc. 92,
entered by the Honorable Ortrie D. Smith on May 17, 2017:
The Court grants Defendants’ first motion to dismiss (Doc. #28). AMEC Plaintiffs’
claims against the State of Missouri are dismissed, and their state-law claims are dismissed without
prejudice. The Court denies Defendants’ second motion to dismiss (Doc. #30). The Court
dismisses Count II of FFEF Plaintiffs’ Complaint, pursuant to FFEF Plaintiffs’ representation that
they are abandoning this claim.
The Court partially grants Plaintiffs’ motions for permanent injunction. Case No.
17-4006, Doc. #14; Case No. 14-4332, Doc. #18. In granting Plaintiffs’ motions, the Court does
not enjoin enforcement of Section 23 in its entirety. The Court finds unconstitutional portions of
Section 23 are severable consistent with Section 23’s severability provision. See § 23.8
It is therefore Ordered
1. The Court permanently enjoins Defendants from enforcing Article VIII, Sections
23.3(3) and 23.3(16)(c) of the Missouri Constitution against a corporation or labor organization for
making a contribution to a campaign committee that only supports or opposes ballot measures.
2. The Court permanently enjoins Defendants from enforcing Article VIII, Section
23.3(1)(a) of the Missouri Constitution against a person whose contribution to elect a single
individual to office in a single election does not exceed $2,600 per election, allowing for an
adjustment of the contribution limit as described in Section 23.3(18).
3. The Court permanently enjoins Defendants from enforcing Article VIII, Section
23.3(1)(a) of the Missouri Constitution against a person who contributes to a continuing
committee or political action committee unless the contribution is restricted or designated for a
specific candidate as Missouri Ethics Commission Advisory Opinion No. 2017.02.CF.003
provides.
4. The Court permanently enjoins Defendants from enforcing Article VIII, Section
23.3(16)(c) of the Missouri Constitution against a continuing committee or political action
committee that accepts contributions from a foreign corporation that has authority to transact
business in Missouri pursuant to chapters 347 through 360 of the Missouri Revised Statutes.
This is consistent with Missouri Ethics Commission Advisory Opinion No. 2017.02.CF.006.
5. The Court permanently enjoins Defendants from enforcing Article VIII, Section
23.3(12) of the Missouri Constitution’s prohibition against political action committees receiving
contributions from entities formed outside of chapters 347 through 360 of the Missouri Revised
Statutes.
6. The Court permanently enjoins Defendants from enforcing Article VIII, Section
23.3(12) of the Missouri Constitution’s prohibition on political action committees receiving
contributions from other political action committees.
Defendants requested this Court stay any injunctive relief ordered to allow Defendants the
opportunity to appeal this Court’s decision. The Court grants this request. The Court stays
enforcement of the May 5, 2017 Order for a period of forty-five days after entry of the May 5, 2017
Order.
Date: May 17, 2017
PAIGE WYMORE-WYNN
Acting Clerk of Court
s/ RENEA MATTHES MITRA
By: Renea Matthes Mitra, Courtroom Deputy
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?