Your web browser is not supported You're using Internet Explorer, some features might not work. Please switch to another browser like Chrome, Firefox, or Edge for a better experience.


An official website of the United States government Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .gov**
            
            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
            
            A **lock** ( A locked padlock ) or **https://** means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Federal Election Commission | United States of America Calendar
           Glossary
          Search
              Search


Menu
      Home
      Campaign finance data
        All data
            Raising
            Spending
            Loans and debts
            Filings and reports
            Candidates
            Committees
            Bulk data
            Campaign finance statistics
        Find elections. Search by state or ZIP code
          Look up contributions from specific individuals
      Help for candidates and committees
        All compliance resources
            Guides
            Forms
            Dates and deadlines
            Trainings
        Learn about electronic filing
          Find and contact your committee's analyst
      Legal resources
        All legal resources
            Advisory opinions
            Enforcement
            Statutes
            Legislation
            Regulations
            Court cases
            Policy and other guidance
        Search across legal resources
          Search guidance documents
      About
        All about the FEC
            News and announcements
            Commission meetings
            Mission and history
            Leadership and structure
            Reports about the FEC
            Careers
            Working with the FEC
            Contact
        Introduction to campaign finance and elections


- Home
- ›
      FEC Record: Litigation
- ›
      Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), et al. v. FEC (District court)

FEC Record: Litigation*Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), et al. v. FEC* (10-1350)(District court 2011)August 23, 2011 On August 1, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia entered judgment in favor of the Commission in *Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) et al. v. FEC*, granting the Commission’s motion to dismiss this
    case. CREW and its executive director Melanie Sloan had filed suit alleging that the Commission had wrongfully dismissed their administrative complaint and claiming that the agency had failed to provide timely notice of its dismissal as well as the
    reasons for dismissal. **Background** In March 2007, plaintiffs filed an enforcement complaint with the FEC against Peace Through Strength Political Action Committee (PTS PAC), a leadership PAC sponsored by Representative Duncan Hunter. The complaint alleged that the PAC provided financial
    support in amounts beyond those permitted by the Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act) to Representative Hunter’s Presidential exploratory committee in the form of excessive expenditures for advertisements. The First General Counsel’s report found that, while the expenditures made by PTS PAC for ads cited by CREW in its complaint did not appear to constitute violations of the Act, other disbursements by PTS PAC did indicate possible violations by the exploratory
    committee. The report recommended that the Commission find reason to believe that (1) Representative Hunter failed to timely file a Statement of Candidacy for President and to maintain a record of contributions received or expenditures made while
    he was exploring a potential candidacy for President; (2) his Presidential campaign committee, Hunter for President, Inc. (HFP), failed to report contributions received or expenditures made during the exploratory period; and (3) PTS PAC made, and
    HFP accepted, excessive in-kind contributions to Representative Hunter’s Presidential campaign, in the form of excessive payments for travel to early primary states by Representative Hunter. The report recommended taking no action, however, in regard
    to allegations that PTS PAC failed to report its expenditures for advertising. The Commission voted to approve these recommendations and commenced an investigation (MUR 5908). The investigation found that PTS PAC spent a little over $10,000 for Representative Hunter’s travel expenses. The Second General Counsel’s report recommended that the Commission find that PTS PAC made, and HFP accepted, excessive in-kind contributions.
    In regard to the late filing of the Statement of Candidacy, because it was only three days late, the General Counsel recommended that the Commission not pursue a civil penalty. Finally, the General Counsel recommended that the Commission take no action
    in regard to the allegations about PTS PAC expenditures for advertising. The Commission voted to dismiss MUR 5908 on June 29, 2010. In a Statement of Reasons for its dismissal, the Commission explained that because the amount of any potentially excessive contributions by PTS PAC to HFP was small, and the late filing of the
    Statement of Candidacy was *de minimis*, the Commission chose to exercise prosecutorial discretion and close the case regarding both allegations. Subsequently, the Commission notified CREW of its decision to close the file by letter dated July
    23, 2010, and sent CREW its Statement of Reasons by letter dated August 24, 2010. Section 437g(a)(8)(B) of the Act provides that the complainants may petition the court to review a Commission decision to dismiss an administrative complaint in an enforcement case within 60 days after that dismissal. On August 11, 2010, CREW filed a
    complaint (amended on October 28, 2010) with the District Court alleging that the Commission wrongfully dismissed MUR 5908, did not timely notify CREW of its dismissal and had an unlawful policy and practice of failing to provide enforcement case
    complainants with what plaintiffs claimed was the “‘statutorily mandated 60 days’ notice of dismissal and basis of dismissal.’” The FEC moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that CREW lacked standing and failed to state a claim. **District court decision** In its memorandum opinion, the District Court noted that CREW must establish its standing to pursue its claim. The court noted that, while CREW had the right to file an administrative complaint with the FEC, that right did not grant them standing to seek
    judicial review of the disposition of that complaint. Thus, the court analyzed whether CREW had standing in the case. In its arguments, the Commission contended that CREW failed to establish standing to appeal the dismissal of MUR 5908 under prongs one and three of the test in *Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife*,
    504 U.S. 555 (1992). The court noted that under the first prong of the *Lujan* test, “the plaintiff “must have suffered an ‘injury in fact’ – an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized . . . and (b)
    ‘actual or imminent, not “conjectural” or “hypothetical[.]” The court also noted that under the third prong of the *Lujan* test, “it must be ‘likely,’ as opposed to merely ‘speculative,’ that the injury will be ‘redressed by a favorable decision.’” The court’s review of the complaints, the General Counsel’s reports and the FEC’s Statement of Reasons led the court to find that CREW failed to suffer an “informational injury” as the amount spent on travel was publicly disclosed in FEC reports. Since
    the amended complaint filed by CREW demanded amended FEC filings regarding the previously disclosed expenditures, the court found that the Plaintiffs did not have standing to bring their claim for wrongful dismissal of MUR 5908. Regarding the claim that the Commission failed to timely notify CREW of its dismissal of the case, the court noted that the Act requires that any court challenge be filed within 60 days of the agency’s dismissal, but it does not contain a timeframe in
    which a complainant must receive notice of the dismissal. In this case, the Commission voted to dismiss the case on June 29, 2010, notified CREW of its decision to close the file by letter dated July 23, 2010 and sent CREW its Statement of Reasons
    by letter dated August 24, 2010. Because the agency notified CREW of its decision to dismiss the administrative complaint within the 60-day timeframe, the district court found that CREW did not have standing to bring this claim. The text of the court’s opinion is available at https://transition.fec.gov/law/litigation/crew101350_dc_memo_opinion.pdf. United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 10-1350 (JEB)), August 1, 2011**.** **Resources:** CREW v. FEClitigation page
    FEC enforcement - Enter 5908 into case number search field to see related documents
 Author
          Dorothy  YeagerEnterprise Resource Analyst


Read next: FEC to host San Diego conference in October (2011)
 Related: Explore campaign finance data »


This information is not intended to replace the law or to change its meaning, nor does this information create or confer any rights for or on any person or bind the Federal Election Commission or the public. The reader is encouraged also to consult the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (52 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.), Commission regulations (Title 11 of the Code of Federal Regulations), Commission advisory opinions and applicable court decisions.


About
          Careers
          Press
          Contact
   Privacy and security policy
          Plain language
          Accessibility statement
          Strategy, budget and performance
 No FEAR Act
          Open government
          Protected Voices
          USA.gov
          Inspector General
 FOIA
          OpenFEC API
          GitHub repository
          Release notes
          FEC.gov status


Federal Election Commission
 The FEC's Twitter page
            The FEC's YouTube page Sign up for FECMail
 This information is produced and disseminated at U.S. taxpayer expense.


Hide glossary Glossary Search terms