HUDSON, JR. v. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
1:17-cv-01447
D.D.C.Sep 27, 2017Background
- Eugene Hudson Jr., AFGE National Secretary-Treasurer, published a 16-page Fall 2016 "NST ADVISOR" and announced candidacy for AFGE National President in Dec. 2016.
- At AFGE's February 2017 legislative conference, Hudson distributed conference packets and attempted to include the Fall 2016 NST ADVISOR.
- AFGE instructed employees to remove Hudson’s ADVISOR from attendee packets, allegedly because AFGE considered it campaign material and an improper use of union funds.
- Hudson sued under 29 U.S.C. § 481(c) (LMRDA), alleging the removal discriminated against him as a candidate and seeking a declaration that AFGE violated his rights and attorney’s fees.
- AFGE moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction/standing and for failure to state a claim; the Court treated Hudson’s factual allegations as true for the motion but evaluated jurisdiction and merits.
- The Court granted dismissal without prejudice, finding § 481(c) inapplicable because Hudson admitted the ADVISOR was not campaign literature and, alternatively, Hudson failed to allege compliance with the statute’s prerequisites (reasonable request and candidate-paid distribution).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article III standing / redressability | Hudson claimed injury from removal and sought declaration and fees; argued court could order AFGE to distribute the ADVISOR | AFGE argued declaratory relief and fees would not redress the injury of the removed distribution | Court: Declaratory relief and fees as pleaded do not redress the injury; amendment to seek distribution might cure redressability but would not cure merits defects |
| Whether ADVISOR is protected "campaign literature" under 29 U.S.C. § 481(c) | Hudson alleged and admitted the Fall 2016 ADVISOR was not published or treated as campaign literature (including in Feb. 2017) | AFGE argued the union regarded the ADVISOR as campaign literature, invoking § 481(c) obligations if it were campaign material | Court: Must accept plaintiff’s own characterization; because Hudson conceded it was not campaign literature, § 481(c) does not apply |
| Failure to meet statutory prerequisites of § 481(c) (reasonable request and candidate payment) | Hudson argued AFGE improperly removed the ADVISOR despite his distribution attempt | AFGE emphasized statute requires reasonable request and distribution at candidate’s expense; Hudson conceded he did not follow AFGE protocol | Court: Even if treated as campaign literature, Hudson failed to allege a reasonable request or that he bore distribution costs, so claim fails |
| Dismissal disposition | Hudson sought relief and fees; suggested relief in briefing to cure redressability | AFGE sought dismissal on jurisdictional and merits grounds | Court: Granted motion to dismiss without prejudice (merits and redressability defects); leave implicit that amendment would not cure merits issues |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requirements: injury-in-fact, causation, redressability)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (legal conclusions need not be accepted as true)
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (1998) (redressability requirement and limits on standing through fee recovery)
- Sparrow v. United Air Lines, Inc., 216 F.3d 1111 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (pleading inferences governed at motion to dismiss)
- Jerome Stevens Pharm., Inc. v. FDA, 402 F.3d 1249 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (consideration of extrinsic materials on certain jurisdictional motions)
- U.S. Ecology, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 231 F.3d 20 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (standing deficiencies defeat claim)