Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 1 of 12 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

AMERICA FIRST LEGAL FOUNDATION, 

611 Pennsylvania Avenue SE #231 

Washington, DC 20003 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, 

1050 First Street NE 

Washington, DC 20463 

Defendant. 

Civil Action No.: 24-517 

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

I. INTRODUCTION 

1. On April 20, 2023, the House Judiciary Committee revealed that the 

letter from 51 former intelligence officials (“Letter of 51”), alleging that “the arrival 

on the US political scene of emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s 

son Hunter, much of it related to his time serving on the Board of the Ukrainian gas 

company Burisma, has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation,” 

was the product of the Biden campaign according to testimony from former Deputy 

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Michael Morell, who signed the Letter of 

51. Letter from Jim Jordan, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Michael R. 

Turner, Chairman, Permanent Select Comm. on Intel., to the Hon. Antony Blinken, 

Sec’y, U.S. Dep’t of State (Apr. 20, 2023), https://bit.ly/3UGKsEs (citing Jim Clapper 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 2 of 12 

et al., Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails (Oct. 19, 2020) (available at 

https://bit.ly/3SZDKrN)). 

2. Nearly four out of five Americans, or 79 percent, believe that had there 

been “truthful” coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop, it would have changed the 

outcome of the 2020 presidential election. See Bruce Golding, 79% Say ‘Truthful’ 

Coverage of Hunter Biden’s Laptop Would Have Changed 2020 Election, N.Y. POST 

(Aug. 26, 2022), https://bit.ly/3Vm6SaC; see also Jerry Dunleavy, Barr says Hunter 

Biden Russian Disinformation Claims ‘Probably Affected’ Election Outcome, WASH. 

EXAMINER (Mar. 22, 2022), https://bit.ly/3jqg0Ol. 

3. Biden for President, Biden Victory Fund, DNC Services Corp/Democratic 

National Committee, and Biden Action Fund (collectively, the “Respondents”) failed 

to report the direct contributions, indirect contributions, and coordinated 

communications made in connection with the “Letter of 51” to the Federal Election 

Commission (“Commission”). 

4. On October 23, 2023, the Plaintiff, America First Legal Foundation, filed 

with the Commission an administrative complaint (MUR 8182) showing that the 

Respondents received and failed to report direct contributions, indirect contributions, 

and coordinated communications in violation of 52 U.S.C. § 30104. Attach. 1 (“Admin. 

Compl.”). 

5. America First Legal’s administrative complaint has been pending for over 

120 days, yet the Commission has taken no action. 

2 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 3 of 12 

6. The Federal Election Campaign Act, 52 U.S.C. §30101 et seq., provides 

administrative complainants with a right of action against the Commission if the 

Commission fails to act on a complaint within 120 days, at which point, “the court 

may declare that ... the failure to act is contrary to law and may direct the 

Commission to conform with such declaration within 30 days, failing which the 

complainant may bring, in the name of such complainant, a civil action to remedy the 

violation in the original complaint.” 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8)(C). 

7. America First Legal brings this action under 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8)(C) 

of the Federal Election Campaign Act seeking injunctive and declaratory relief to 

compel the Commission to act on America First Legal’s administrative complaint 

regarding the Respondents failure to file reports disclosing its contributors, 

contributions, and coordinated communications in violation of 52 U.S.C. § 30104. 

II. THE PARTIES 

8. The Plaintiff, America First Legal Foundation, is a national, nonprofit 

organization working to promote the rule of law in the United States, prevent 

executive overreach, and ensure due process and equal protection for all Americans, 

all to promote public knowledge and understanding of the law and individual rights 

guaranteed under the Constitution and laws of the United States. America First 

Legal uses a combination of research, litigation, and advocacy to advance its mission. 

9. In furtherance of its mission, America First Legal seeks to expose the 

unethical and illegal conduct of government officials. America First Legal does this 

by gathering information related to coordinated election interference activities by 

3 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 4 of 12 

government agencies and officials and making such information available to the 

public through its website, press releases, and social media. Publicizing campaign 

finance violators and filing complaints with the Commission serve America First 

Legal’s mission by keeping the public informed, thereby deterring future violations 

of campaign finance law. America First Legal’s organizational activities and financial 

resources are dependent upon its ability to obtain relevant information and disclose 

it to the public. Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman, 455 U.S. 363, 379 (1982). Therefore, 

America First Legal is harmed when a regulated person or entity either fails to 

disclose or provides false information in reports required by the Federal Election 

Campaign Act. 

10. America First Legal relies on the Commission to properly administer the 

Act’s reporting requirements because these reports are the only source of information 

that America First Legal can use to determine if a regulated person complies with 

the Act. The proper administration of the Act includes ensuring that all disclosure 

reports are correctly and timely filed with the Commission. 

11. Federal enforcement is necessary when federal campaign finance and 

support turn from a private civic act to election interference and public corruption. 

McCormick v. United States, 500 U.S. 257 (1991); Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 

255 (1992). Therefore, America First Legal’s programmatic activity is hindered when 

the Commission fails to administer the Act properly. See Campaign Legal Ctr. v. FEC, 

466 F. Supp. 3d 141, 146 (D.D.C. 2022) (citing FEC v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11, 14 (1998)). 

4 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 5 of 12 

12. By failing to act on America First Legal’s administrative complaint, the 

Commission has harmed America First Legal by allowing a campaign for President 

of the United States to benefit from undisclosed contributions and coordinated inkind expenditures in furtherance of using a campaign platform misrepresented as an 

unbiased and non-political report contrary to 52 U.S.C. §§ 30104(b)(2)(A) and 

(b)(3)(A). 

13. The Defendant, the Federal Election Commission, is an independent 

federal agency charged with the administration and civil enforcement of the Federal 

Election Campaign Act. 52 U.S.C. § 30106. 

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

14. This Court has both subject matter jurisdiction over this action and 

personal jurisdiction over the parties under 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8)(A) and 28 U.S.C. 

§§ 1331, 2201. 

15. Venue is proper under 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8)(A) and 28 U.S.C. § 1391. 

16. Declaratory and injunctive relief are authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 

2202. 

17. This Court also has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 

IV. BACKGROUND 

18. On October 15, 2020, The Hill linked Hunter Biden’s laptop to an alleged 

Russian influence campaign to pass misinformation to President Trump, through his 

personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. Citing an anonymous source, The Hill reported, 

“Several senior administration officials, including Attorney General William Barr, 

5 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 6 of 12 

FBI Director Christopher Wray and White House counsel Pat Cipollone ‘all had 

common understanding’ that Russia was targeting the president’s personal lawyer.” 

Justine Coleman, Intelligence Officials Warned Trump That Giuliani Was Target of 

Russian Influence Campaign, THE HILL (Oct. 15, 2020), https://bit.ly/3WzHaQV. 

19. On October 15, 2020, NBC reported that “Federal investigators are 

examining whether emails allegedly describing activities by Joe Biden and his son 

Hunter and found on a laptop at a Delaware repair shop are linked to a foreign 

intelligence operation” based on claims made by “two people familiar with the 

matter”; and that the evidence of Biden corruption was “greeted with widespread 

skepticism.” Ken Dilanian, Feds Examining Whether Alleged Hunter Biden Emails 

Are Linked to a Foreign Intel Operation, NBC NEWS (Oct. 15, 2020), 

https://bit.ly/3BOh5FZ. 

20. On October 16, 2020, CNN reported, under six bylines, that “US 

authorities are investigating whether the published emails that purport to detail the 

business dealings of Joe Biden’s son in Ukraine and China are connected to an 

ongoing Russian disinformation effort targeting the former vice president’s 

campaign, a US official and a congressional source briefed on the matter said.” 

Marshall Cohen et al., US Authorities Investigating if Recently Published Emails Are 

Tied to Russian Disinformation Effort Targeting Biden, CNN (Oct. 16, 2020), 

https://bit.ly/42DP5Rz. It declared that “Giuliani has openly coordinated with a 

known Russian agent to promote disinformation about the Bidens” and that “[t]he 

FBI is leading the investigation.” Id. 

6 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 7 of 12 

21. Also, on October 16, 2020, House Intelligence Committee Chairman 

Adam Schiff claimed that Hunter Biden’s laptop was a Russian disinformation 

campaign. Adam Shaw, Adam Schiff Claims Hunter Biden Email Stories Come ‘From 

the Kremlin,’ FOX NEWS (Oct. 17, 2020), https://bit.ly/3V5Lczg. 

22. “We know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin,” 

Schiff said, “That’s been clear for well over a year now that they’ve been pushing this 

false narrative about the vice president and his son . . . . Clearly, the origins of this 

whole smear are from the Kremlin, and the President is only too happy to have 

Kremlin help and try to amplify it.” The Situation Room (@CNNSitRoom), TWITTER 

(Oct. 16, 2020, 7:24 PM), bit.ly/3NxGEQB (emphasis added). 

23. Also, on October 16, 2020, a Twitter executive noted “well-timed briefings 

from Gov’t sources...which would support an assessment that [the laptop is] neither 

whistleblower nor dissident content.” See Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger), 

TWITTER (Dec. 19, 2022, 1:25 PM), https://bit.ly/3uA4zJG. 

24. On October 19, 2020, Politico released a contemporaneously dated letter 

from 51 former intelligence officials, including Trump critics John Brennan, Jim 

Clapper, and Michael Hayden, alleging that “the arrival on the US political scene of 

emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter, much of it related 

to his time serving on the Board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, has all the 

classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” See Natasha Bertrand, Hunter 

Biden Story Is Russian Disinfo, Dozens of Former Intel Officials Say, POLITICO (Oct. 

19, 2020), https://bit.ly/49f8KtH (citing Jim Clapper et al., supra). 

7 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 8 of 12 

25. As reported, the 51 former intelligence officials further alleged that “[f]or 

the Russians at this point, with Trump down in the polls, there is [an] incentive for 

Moscow to pull out the stops to do anything possible to help Trump win and/or to 

weaken Biden should he win. A ‘laptop op’ fits the bill, as the publication of the emails 

[is] clearly designed to discredit Biden.” Jim Clapper et al., supra. 

26. The officials concluded that “[o]ur view that the Russians are involved in 

the Hunter Biden email issue” was shared by “Executive Branch departments and 

agencies [and] It is high time that Russia stops interfering in our democracy.” Id. 

(emphasis in original). 

27. Former Intelligence Official Jim Baker insisted in an internal email that 

the Hunter Biden laptop evidence was faked and/or hacked. Michael Shellenberger 

(@shellenberger), TWITTER (Dec. 19, 2022, 1:10 PM), https://bit.ly/3I0e4ov; Michael 

Shellenberger (@shellenberger), TWITTER (Dec. 19, 2022, 1:20 PM), 

https://bit.ly/3wgcoVA. Baker reportedly reached out to Matthew Perry in the FBI’s 

Office of General Counsel to coordinate a response. Id. 

28. Michael Morell testified before the House Judiciary and Intelligence 

Committees that, on or around October 17, 2020—which was just days before the 

“Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” was penned—Antony Blinken 

reached out to him to discuss the Hunter Biden laptop story. See Admin. Compl. Ex. 

1 at 2; Admin. Compl. Ex. 5; Admin. Compl. Ex. 6. 

29. Morell further testified that the Biden campaign “helped to strategize 

about the public release of the statement.” Admin. Compl. Ex. 5 at 3. 

8 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 9 of 12 

30. Morell told Blinken that he was not familiar with the reporting. Blinken 

emailed Morell a USA Today article alleging the FBI was investigating whether it 

was Russian disinformation. At the bottom of the email was the signature block of 

Andrew Bates, then-director of rapid response for the Biden campaign. Admin. 

Compl. Ex. 1 at 2; Admin. Compl. Ex. 5 at 3. 

31. Morell began drafting the “Letter of 51,” which he testified would not have 

happened but for Blinken’s communication. Admin. Compl. Ex. 1 at 2–3; Admin. 

Compl. Ex. 5 at 2. 

32. During the October 22 presidential debate, then-Vice President Biden 

used the “Letter of 51” to rebut President Trump’s criticisms of the Biden Family’s 

foreign entanglements. Admin. Compl. Ex. 1 at 53–59; Admin. Compl. Ex. 5 at 3. 

33. Biden campaign chairman Steve Ricchetti called Morell to thank him for 

the statement. Admin. Compl. Ex. 1 at 58–59; Admin. Compl. Ex. 5 at 3. 

34. Also, the Biden campaign coordinated the dissemination of the “Letter of 

51” to the media. Admin. Compl. Ex. 1 at 36–52; Admin. Compl. Ex. 5 at 3–4. 

35. Morell tasked Nick Shapiro, his former Deputy Chief of Staff and Senior 

Advisor at the CIA, with placing the statement in major publications. Admin. Compl. 

Ex. 1 at 36–44; Admin. Compl. Ex. 5 at 3. 

36. Specifically, Morell apprised Shapiro that “[b]etween us, the campaign 

would like” a specific reporter with the Washington Post to run the statement first. 

Admin. Compl. Ex. 1 at 3, 37. 

9 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 10 of 12 

37. Shapiro crafted an email for three separate media outlets and sent the 

content of the email to the Biden campaign’s Director of Rapid Response, Andrew 

Bates, stating, “This is what I gave them.” Admin. Compl. Ex. 1 at 3, 41. 

38. Politico released the “Letter of 51” with a story headlined: “Hunter Biden 

story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.” Natasha Bertrand, 

supra. 

39. The Commission’s records show that Leon Panetta donated to the Biden 

Victory Fund and Biden for President on June 29, 2020, and that James Clapper 

donated to the Biden Victory Fund and Biden for President on October 4, 2020. 

Admin. Compl. Ex. 3; Admin. Compl. Ex. 4. 

40. Contemporaneous emails show the organizers’ intent in drafting and 

releasing the statement: “[W]e think Trump will attack Biden on the issue at this 

week’s debate and we want to offer perspectives on this from Russia watchers and 

other seasoned experts,” and “we want to give the [Vice President] a talking point to 

use in response.” Admin. Compl. Ex. 1 at 2. 

41. Because Morrell, Brennan, Clapper, and the other signatories were 

supposedly “nonpartisan” national security and intelligence experts, their public 

statement was a campaign contribution of substantial value to the Respondents, who 

solicited the “Letter of 51” from them for the express purpose of influencing the 2020 

Presidential election. Yet, the Respondents failed to report the contribution and to 

identify the individuals who made it. Admin. Compl. ¶¶ 11–40. 

10 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 11 of 12 

42. While Politico typically charges fees for advertising done on behalf of 

political campaigns, the Respondents caused Politico to publish the “Letter of 51” — 

which substantially influenced the outcome of the election. Yet, the Respondents 

failed to report the coordinated communication. Admin. Compl. ¶¶ 41–49; Admin. 

Compl. Ex. 8; Admin. Compl. Ex. 9. 

V. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS 

43. On October 23, 2023, America First Legal filed an administrative 

complaint with the Commission seeking enforcement of the Federal Election 

Campaign Act’s reporting requirements, 52 U.S.C. § 30104. 

44. On October 30, 2023, the Commission sent America First Legal a letter 

acknowledging receipt of the administrative complaint and designating it MUR 8182. 

45. To date, the Commission has taken no action on the complaint, which has 

been pending for over 120 days. 

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION 

FECA, 52 U.S.C. § 30109(8)(A) 

46. The Plaintiff repeats paragraphs 1–45. 

47. The Defendant’s failure to act on the Plaintiff’s administrative complaint 

is contrary to law. See 52 U.S.C. § 30109(8)(A). 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

WHEREFORE, America First Legal requests that this Court: 

11 
Case 1:24-cv-00517 Document 1 Filed 02/25/24 Page 12 of 12 

A. Declare that the Commission’s failure to act on the Plaintiff’s 

administrative complaint is contrary to law under 52 U.S.C. § 

30109(8)(A); 

B. Order the FEC to conform with this declaration within 30 days pursuant 

to 52 U.S.C. § 30109(8)(C); 

C. Award Plaintiff its costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in this 

action; and 

D. Grant such other relief the Court may deem just and proper. 

February 25, 2024 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Michael Ding 

Reed D. Rubinstein (D.C. Bar No. 400153) 

Daniel Epstein (D.C. Bar No. 1009132) 

Juli Haller (D.C. Bar No. 466921) 

Michael Ding (D.C. Bar No. 1027252) 

AMERICA FIRST LEGAL FOUNDATION 

611 Pennsylvania Avenue SE #231 

Washington, DC 20003 

(202) 964-3721 

Reed.Rubinstein@aflegal.org 

Daniel.Epstein@aflegal.org 

Juli.Haller@aflegal.org 

Michael.Ding@aflegal.org 

12