49 F.4th 849
3d Cir.2022Background
- New Jersey Bankers Association (NJBA) is a nonprofit trade association representing banks in New Jersey that sought to make independent expenditures and contributions in state/local elections but refrained out of concern about enforcement of N.J. Stat. Ann. § 19:34-45.
- Section 19:34-45 bars “corporations carrying on the business of a bank” from paying or contributing money or things of value to aid or promote candidates or political parties.
- NJBA sued the New Jersey Attorney General (Nov. 6, 2018), alleging (Count I) the statute unlawfully covers independent expenditures and (Count II) the contribution ban is unconstitutional under the First Amendment; it sought declaratory and injunctive relief.
- The district court granted summary judgment to NJBA on Count I (holding the statute forbids independent expenditures in violation of the First Amendment) and to the Attorney General on Count II (upholding the contribution ban under intermediate scrutiny).
- The Third Circuit found NJBA has Article III standing to sue on its own behalf but held, on statutory grounds, that NJBA is not a “corporation carrying on the business of a bank,” so § 19:34-45 does not apply to it; the court therefore reversed and remanded and declined to resolve the First Amendment questions.
- The Third Circuit also held NJBA may not assert a facial challenge on behalf of its member banks (no prudential third-party standing): NJBA failed to show member banks face an impediment to suing or allege actual abridgment of members’ rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article III standing (NJBA’s own claim) | NJBA faces a credible threat of enforcement and injury from §19:34-45 because it intends to make political expenditures and contributions | AG argued either no credible threat or plaintiff lacks injury | Court: NJBA has Article III standing (intends protected conduct, statute arguably proscribes it, AG’s prior opinion shows threat) |
| Statutory scope: Is NJBA a "corporation carrying on the business of a bank"? | NJBA contended it does not engage in banking functions and thus is not covered | AG argued trade associations funded by banks should be covered to prevent circumvention of the ban | Court: Statutory text interpreted by ordinary meaning — a "bank" receives deposits and makes loans — NJBA is not such a corporation; statute does not apply to NJBA |
| Does §19:34-45 cover independent expenditures? | NJBA argued the statute’s language reaches independent expenditures and thus is unconstitutional as applied | AG argued the statute targets contributions only and does not bar independent expenditures | Court: Did not reach the constitutional question because statute does not apply to NJBA (statutory-avoidance) |
| Facial challenge / third-party standing for member banks | NJBA sought a facial ruling on behalf of banks to prevent chilling of members’ speech | AG argued NJBA cannot assert members’ rights without showing impediment or actual member injury | Court: NJBA cannot bring facial third-party challenge — failed prudential standing criteria (no alleged member injury or hindrance) |
Key Cases Cited
- Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (corporate independent-expenditure restrictions and First Amendment)
- Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, 573 U.S. 149 (credible-threat-of-prosecution test for pre-enforcement standing)
- Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (Article III injury-in-fact requirement)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (standing: injury, traceability, redressability)
- MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 549 U.S. 118 (no need to assume liability before challenging statute)
- Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601 (overbreadth doctrine and facial First Amendment challenges)
- McCutcheon v. FEC, 572 U.S. 185 (quid-pro-quo corruption as the only legitimate interest for restricting campaign finances)
- Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 572 U.S. 545 (statutory interpretation begins and ends with text)