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 all 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
- ›
      Beam v. Gonzales

FEC Record: Litigation*Beam v. Gonzales*May 1, 2008 On March 7, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted the Commission’s motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint filed by Jack and Renee Beam (the plaintiffs) against the U.S. Attorney General and the Chairman of the FEC. The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims, that plaintiffs failed to establish Article III standing, the case was not ripe for review and the FEC did not violate the Federal Election CampaignAct(the Act). Background The Beam case is one of the several casesconcerning the investigation into theMichigan law firm of Fieger, Fieger,Kenney & Johnson (see Marcusv. Mukasey). Accordingto the complaint filed March2, 2007, the Beam plaintiffs madecontributions to John Edwards’ 2004 presidential campaign. The plaintiffsallege that in November 2005,the Department of Justice began aninvestigation into possible violations of the Act by the plaintiffs and othermembers of the law firm. PlaintiffJack Beam is “Of Counsel” to thelaw firm. On September 26, 2006,the Commission notified the plaintiffsthat the Commission had begunan investigation of potential civilviolations of the Act. See the April2007 Record. The plaintiffs filed a complaintwith the District Court in Illinois, allegingthat the Department of Justicecould not investigate the allegedcriminal violations of the Act untilthe Commission formally referredthe matter to the Department ofJustice. Additionally, the complaintalleged that the Commission failedto uphold the Act and asked thecourt to require the Commission toconduct and conclude an investigationprior to referral to the Departmentof Justice. This Complaint wasdismissed on June 22, 2007, but thecourt granted plaintiffs leave to file aFirst Amended Complaint. Plaintiffsfiled their First Amended Complainton June 29, 2007, raising substantiallythe same allegations containedin their initial Complaint, but addingnew allegations that the Departmentof Justice and the Commissionobtained their private bank recordsillegally in violation of the Rightto Financial Privacy Act (RFPA), 2U.S.C. § 3401 et seq., and that thedefendants retaliated against plaintiffsfor engaging in constitutionallyprotected activity. Court decision The District Court found in favor of the Commission and theDepartment of Justice on every issueaddressed in the decision. Thecourt held that the plaintiffs lackedstanding necessary for the courtto have subject matter jurisdictionover the suit. The plaintiffs did notallege in their complaint that theDepartment of Justice had “raided”their own home or seized theirown  bank records, but alleged onlyraids affecting other Fieger associatesand employees. The plaintiffsdid not show that they had sufferedany harm and thus did not meet thejudicial requirement of “injury infact.” The Court also found plaintiffsfailed to establish standing withrespect to the RFPA claim becausethey relied only upon “unsubstantiatedspeculation” that the Commissionhad possession of their private bankingrecords and that the Commissionhad illicitly obtained those records. The court also found that theplaintiffs’ case was not ripe forreview. The court stated that becauseneither the Attorney General northe FEC had made decisions aboutwhether or how to enforce applicablelaws against the plaintiffs, the courtcould not assess whether any agencymisconduct affected the plaintiffs.Additionally, the plaintiffs identifiedno hardship that they would suffer ifthe court were to wait to decide theirclaims until the alleged investigationswere complete. Although the plaintiffs alleged that the Commission violated the Act in several ways, the court found that the allegations provided no basis for relief. The court agreed with the other district court decisions inFieger v. GonzalesandBialek v. Gonzales. The court held that, contrary to plaintiffs’ assertions, the FEC is not required to refer a matter to the Department of Justice prior to the Attorney General initiating an investigation. The Attorney General has sole authority to investigate  and prosecute criminal violations of the U.S. Code, unless Congress clearly and unambiguously restricts that authority. The court found no evidencethat Congress intended to limit theAttorney General’s authority to prosecutecriminal violations of the Act. Regarding the plaintiffs’ request that the court order the FEC to conductan investigation into the allegedillegal activities, the court foundthat “the judiciary has no power todictate the timing or nature of aninvestigation,” or require the FEC toconduct an investigation at all. The court granted leave toplaintiffs to file a Second AmendedComplaint. Plaintiffs filed their newcomplaint on March 24, 2008. U.S. District Court for theNorthern District of Illinois,1:07-cv-01227.
 Author
          Meredith Metzler


Read next: Beam v. Hunter
 Related: Explore legal resources »


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
          No FEAR Act
          Strategy, budget and performance
 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


Hide glossary Glossary Search terms