682 F.3d 643
7th Cir.2012Background
- Illinois enacted a $5 million appropriation for a Department grant program.
- Friends of the Cross received a $20,000 grant for Bald Knob Cross restoration from the Department.
- Sherman, an Illinois taxpayer, sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Establishment Clause violation.
- District court and Seventh Circuit dismiss for lack of Article III standing under Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation.
- Relief sought included declaratory/injunctive relief and mandamus; restitution against Friends, but relief denied by Hein and Laskowski.
- Court affirms dismissal, holding no standing to challenge discretionary executive expenditures that lack a specific legislative action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sherman has taxpayer standing to sue | Sherman asserts general complaint about state funding of religious symbol. | Defendants rely on Hein; no specific legislative action identifiable. | No standing; lacks specific congressional action. |
| Whether the grant was a specific appropriation actionable by a taxpayer | Sherman claims Friends were “specifically selected” by the General Assembly. | No binding legislative text designates Friends; general appropriation not actionable. | Not a specific appropriation; Hein applies. |
| Whether Sherman can seek restitution from Friends | Sherman seeks return of disbursed funds. | Relief limited to injunction against disbursement; restitution improper post-disbursement. | Restitution not available; only injunctive relief against disbursement. |
| Whether Laskowski distinguishes from American cases or post-Hein precedent | Argues differences would allow relief. | Post-Hein, no restitution against private recipient remains viable. | Distinction rejected; Hein controls. |
Key Cases Cited
- Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83 (1968) (establishes taxpayer standing limits under taxing-and-spending clause)
- Hein v. Freedom from Religion Found., Inc., 551 U.S. 587 (2007) (limits taxpayer standing to specific congressional action; excludes discretionary executive expenditures)
- Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1 (1998) (standing must affirmatively appear in the record)
- Laskowski v. Spellings, 546 F.3d 822 (2008) (post-Hein, only injunctive relief against disbursement; no restitution against private recipient)
- INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (distinguishes between legislative action and executive procedure)
- Freedom from Religion Found. v. Nicholson, 536 F.3d 730 (7th Cir. 2008) (applies Hein framework to state action via Fourteenth Amendment)
- American Atheists v. City of Detroit, 567 F.3d 278 (6th Cir. 2009) (reargues standing but not controlling post-Hein)