FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T DECEMBER 23, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 11 26 6

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 5 :1 1- cv -0 07 61 -CLS ALABAMA EDUCATION ASSOCIATON, anAlab am a n on -p ro fitco rp or at io n, A-VOTE, anAlab am a p ol it ic al co m m it te e, PAM HILL, JEFF BREECE, CHASSITY SM ITH, et al ., Pl ai nt iff s- App el le es , ve rs us STATE SUPERINTENDEN T OF EDUCATION, STATE OF AL ABAMA, CHANCELLOR OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION, STA TE OF ALABAMA, ATTORNEYFOR LEE COUNTY , STATE O F ALABAMA, Defen da nt s- App el la nt s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 11 26 7

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 5 :1 1- cv -0 07 61 -CLSALABAMA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION,

anAlab am a n on -p ro fitco rp or at io n, A-VOTE, anAlab am a p ol it ic al co m m it te e, PAM HILL, JEFF BREECE, CHASSITY SM ITH, et al ., Pl ai nt iff s- App el le es , ve rs us GOVERNOR OF ALABAMA AND PRESIDENT O F THE STATE SCHOOL BOARD, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, STATE OF ALABAMA, COMP TROLLER, STATE OF ALABAMA, Defen da nt s- App el la nt s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 12 60 9

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 5 :1 1- cv -0 10 54 -CLS INTERNATIONAL A SSOCI ATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, anun in co rp or at edlab ororg an iz at io n, FIREPAC , a p ol it ic al act io n c omm it te e, AMERIC AN FEDERATION O F TEACHERS LOCAL 21 15 , et al ., Pl ai nt iff s- App el le es , ve rs us SUPERINTENDENT OF E DUCATION, 2in hi s capa ci ty as th e Supe rin te nd en t o f

Edu cat io n o f th e St at e o f Alaba m a, STATE OF AL ABAMA, CHANCELLOR OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION, in h er capa ci ty as Ch an cel lo r of Po st se co nd ary Edu cat io n of th e St at e o f Alaba m a, etal., Defen da nt s- App el la nt s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal s fr om

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Dece m be r 23 , 20 11 ) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, COX, Cir cu itJu dg e, an d HUNT, Dis tri ctJu dg e. * DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e: Thi s ap pe al co m es to us fol lo win g t he di st ric t co urt’s en try of a p rel im in ary in jun ct io n p rev en ti ng en fo rcem en t o f Alaba m a ActNo. 2 01 0- 76 1 (t he “ Act” ). Thi s Actwou ldpro hi bi t a s ta te or l oc al go ve rn m en t em pl oyee fro m

arra ng in g “ by pa yro ll de du ct io n o r ot he rwis e” the pa ym en t o f an y co nt rib ut io n t o a n or ga ni zat io n t ha t u se s an y po rti on of t ho se co ntrib ut io ns for“po li ti cal act iv it y .” The di st ric t co urt fo un d t ha t the st atut e im pi ng es onim

po rtantfree sp eech rig ht s pr ot ect edby the Fir stAm en dm en t an d t ha t the App el le es —the Alab am a Edu cat io n

Honora ble W i l l i s B. Hunt, J r., United States District J udg e for the Norther n District of * Geor g ia, sitting by

designation. 3Ass oc ia ti on (“ AEA”) an d o th er o rg an iz at io ns —ar e li ke ly to s uc ceedinsh owi ng

th e Actis bo th ov erb ro adinit s re st ric ti on s an d u ndul y va gu e as to what co ns ti tu te s p ol it ic al act iv it y . W e co nc lu de th atth e co ns ti tu ti on al qu es ti on be fo re us tu rn s upo n aqu es ti onof s ta te law. Ra th er than s pe cu la ti ng as t o t he m ean in g o f a st at e st atut e, we be li ev e itis m or e in ke ep in g wi th th e p rin ci pl es of f ed eral is m to of fer t he Alab am a Supr em e Co urt an op po rtu ni ty to ex pl ic at e th e Act . I. Alab am a Co de §§ 36 -1 -4 .3 an d 3 6- 1- 4.4 au th or iz e p ub li c em pl oyees t o reque stth atth e Alaba m a St at e Co m pt ro ll er arran ge for

th e p aym en t o f m em be rs hi p due s fo r em

pl oyee or ga ni zat io ns by payro ll de du ct io n. Th ere i s te ns io n b etweenth is st atut e an d Al ab am a Co de § 1 7- 17 -5 whi ch pro hi bi ts publ ic em pl oyees fr om

us in g g ov ern m en t re so ur ces foran y “po li ti cal act iv it ie s.” An em pl oyee fo un d i n v io la ti on of § 17 -1 7- 5 i s s ub ject t o p ro se cu ti on for

th e cri m e o f tra di ng inpubl ic off

ic e, a Cl as s A m is de m ean or . In 2 01 0, the Co m pt ro ll er’s Offi ce re ev al ua te d i ts in te rp ret at io n o f § 1 7- 17 -5 an d c ha ng edit s p ol ic y reg ard in g sa la ry de du ct io ns , th erea fte r de cl in in g t o h on orreque st s fo r de du ct io ns th at be ne fit edorg an iz at io ns in vo lv edinpo li ti cal act iv it ie s, i nc lu di ng AEA andit s PAC, A-VOTE. L aws ui ts fol lo wedan d are s ti ll pe nd in g i n t he st at e co urts .

4Afte r th is po li cy ch an ge , inDecem

be r 20 10 , Gov ern orRil ey cal le d asp eci al se ss io n o f th e le gi sl atur e ai m edat e na ct in g e th ic s re fo rm leg is la ti on . Thatsp eci al se ss io n a m en de d § 17 -1 7- 5 t o c od ify the po si ti on of t he Co m pt ro ll er’s Offi ce, fo rb id di ng st at e an d l oc al go ve rn m en t em pl oyees fr om

arra ng in g “ by sal ary de du ct io n o r ot he rwis e fo r an y pa ym en ts to a po li ti cal act io n c ommit te e o r . . . for an y pa ym en ts forth e due s o f an y pe rs on so em

pl oyed t o am em

be rs hi p or ga ni zat io n wh ic h u se s an y po rti on of t he du es forpo li ti cal act iv it y .” Ala. Co de § 1 7- 17 -5 (b )(1 ). The l eg is la ti onli m it s p ol it ic al act iv it y to th e fo ll owi ng sev en cat eg or ie s: a. Mak in g c on tri bu ti on s t o o r co ntract in g wi th an y en ti ty whi ch en ga ge s i n a ny form

of p ol it ic al co m

m un ic at io n, i nc lu di ng co m m un ic at io ns whi ch m en ti on th e n am e o f a p ol it ic al can di da te . b. En ga gi ng inor p ay in g fo r publ ic op in io n p ol li ng . c. Eng ag in g i n o r pa y in g fo r an y form of p ol it ic al co m

m un ic at io n, in cl ud in g c omm

un ic at io ns whi chm en ti on th e n am e o f a p ol it ic al can di da te . d. En ga gi ng inor p ay in g fo r an y type o f po li ti cal adve rti si ng inan y m ed iu m . e. Ph on e cal li ng foran y

po li ti cal pu rp os e. f. Dis tri bu ti ng po li ti cal li te ratur e o f an y type. g. Pr ov id in g a ny ty

pe of i n- ki ndhe lp or s up po rt t o o r fo r a p ol it ic al can di da te . Id. The Actfurth er re qu ire s tha t an y org an iz at io n s eek in g “ to arrang e b y sal ary de du ct io n o r ot he rwis e . . . sha ll cert ify to t he ap pr op ria te go ve rn m en ta l en ti ty tha t

5no ne of the m em be rs hi p due s wi ll be us edforpo li ti cal act iv it y .” Ala. Co de § 1 7- 17 -5 (b )(2 ). AEA col le ct s a l arg e p erce nt ag e o f it s due s t hr ou gh sal ary de du ct io n. AEA arg ue s t ha t the se de du ct io ns are p art ic ul arl y im po rta ntforit s m em

be rs who do no t ha ve ch eck in g a cco un ts . In Fe brua ry 20 11 , AEA file d aco m

pl ai ntcla im in g t ha t th e Actun co ns ti tu ti on al ly infr in ge s o n t he Fir stAm en dm en t ri gh ts of AEA an d i ts m em be rs . Two week s af

te r fi li ng it s co m

pl ai nt , AEA m ov edfora pr el im in ary in jun ct io n b arri ng en fo rcem en t o f th e Acton th e g ro un ds th atitwas l ik el y to sh ow th atth e Actwas b ot h u nc on st itut io na ll y va gu e an d o ve rb ro ad . The d is tri ctco urt ag reed . In i ts op in io n, the co urt re as on edth atth e “ orothe rwis e” l an gu ag e o f th e st atut e rea ch edbe y on d s al ary de du ct io ns to th e p ers on al po li ti cal co nt rib ut io ns of go ve rn m en t em

pl oyees. Th e d is tri ctco urt al so fou ndth atth e te rm “po li ti cal act iv ity ” was un du ly vag ue . II. W e rev ie w a di st ric t co urt’s g ran t o f a p rel im in ary in jun ct io n fo r anab us e o f di sc ret io n. N. Am. Med. Co rp . v. Axio m W or ld wi de, Inc . , 52 2 F .3d12 11 , 12 16 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 8) . The d is tri ctco urt’s fi nd in gs of f actare re vi ewedun de r a cl earl y erro ne ou s s ta nd ard . Id. A fin di ng of f actis cle arl y

erro ne ou s o nl y

when

“ al th ou ghth ere i s ev id en ce t o s up po rt i t, the rev ie win g c ou rt o n the en ti re 6ev id en ce i s l eftwith t he de fin it e an d fi rm co nv ic ti on th ata m is ta ke ha s b een co m m it te d.” Id. (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . The d is tri ctco urt’s co nc lu si on s o f la w are re vi ewed de no vo , “un de rs ta nd in g t ha t ap pl ic at io n o f an im pr op er l eg al st an da rd. . . is ne ve r wit hi n adi st ric t co urt’s d is cret io n.” Id. (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s an d b rack et s o m it te d) . III. A. Cert ifi cat io n o f Que st io ns to th e Alaba m a Supr em e Co urt. The re i s n o que st io n t ha t a p ro pe rly con cei ve d b anon sal ary de du ct io ns to or ga ni zat io ns en ga ge d i n p ol it ic al act iv it y wou ldbe co ns ti tu ti on al . Se e Y su rs a v . Poc at el lo Edu c. Ass ’n , 55 5 U.S. 3 53 , 35 5, 1 29 S. Ct. 1 09 3, 1 09 6 (2 00 9) (“ [N]oth in g i n t he Fir stAm en dm en t p rev en ts a St at e fro m de te rm in in g t ha t i ts po li ti cal subd iv is io ns m ay no t p ro vi de pa yro ll de du ct io ns forpo li ti cal act iv it ie s.”) . In Y su rs a , publ ic em

pl oyee un io ns ch al le ng edanIda ho st at e la w ban on po li ti cal pa yro ll de du ct io ns as avi ol at io n o f th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t. The Co urt b eg anby rei te rat in g t ha t the Fir stAm en dm en t “pr ot ect s t he rig htto be free fro m go ve rn m en t ab rid gm en t o f sp eech . Whi le inso m e co nt ex ts th e g ov ern m en t m us t acco m m od at e ex pr es si on , itis no t re qu ire d t o a ss is t o th ers infun di ng th e ex pr es si on of p art ic ul ar i de as , in cl ud in g p ol it ic al on es .” Id. at35 8, 1 29 S. Ct. at 10 98 ; Regan v. Taxa ti on with Rep rese nt at io n o f Was h. , 46 1 U.S. 5 40 , 54 9, 1 03 S. 7Ct . 19 97 , 20 03 (19 83 ) (“ [A] legi sl atur e’s de ci si on no t t o s ub si di ze the ex erci se of

a fu nd am en ta l ri gh t d oe s n otin fri ng e th e ri gh t, an d t hu s i s n otsubjec t t o s tri ct sc ru ti ny.”). The Co urt ac cep te d t ha t the un io ns ch al le ng in g Id ah o’s l aw face d subs ta nt ia l d iff

ic ul ti es inco ll ect in g fu nd s fo r th ei r po li ti cal sp eech witho utth e as si st an ce o f th e st at e th ro ug h s al ary de du ct io ns . Howev er, thi s fa ctpo se d n o di ffi cu lt y forth e Co urt, wh ic h c on cl ud ed , Whi le publ ic ly adm in is te redpa yro ll de du ct io ns forpo li ti cal purp os es can en hanc e th e u ni on s’ exe rci se of F irs t Am en dm en t ri gh ts , Ida ho is un de r no ob li ga ti on to aidth e u ni on s i n t he ir p ol it ic al act iv it ie s. An d th e St at e’s de ci si on no t t o d o s o i s n otanab rid gm en t o f th e u ni on s’ sp eech ; the y

are fr ee t o e ng ag e in su ch sp eech as t he y see fit . They si m pl y are b arre d fr om

en li st in g t he Sta te insupp ort o f th aten de av or . Y su rs a , 55 5 U.S. at35 9, 1 29 S. Ct. at10 98 . The Co urt the n h el d, “ Id ah o’s de ci si on to li m itpubl ic em pl oyer pa yro ll de du ct io ns as i t h as is no t s ub ject t o st ric t s cru ti ny un de r th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t.” Id . (in te rn al cit at io ns an d quo ta ti on m ark s o mit te d) . In st ead , “ [g ]ive n t ha t the Sta te ha s n otin fri ng edth e u ni on s’ Firs t Am en dm en t ri gh ts , th e St at e n eedon ly dem on st rat e a rat io na l b as is to jus ti fy th e ba n o n p ol it ic al pa yro ll de du ct io ns .” Id. The Supr em e Co urt co nc lu de d t ha t the pa yro ll de du ct io n b anm etth e rat io na l b as is tes t. Itwrot e, The co nc ernth atpo li ti cal pa yro ll de du ct io ns mig htbe see n a s in vo lv in g p ub li c em

pl oyers i n p ol it ic s ar is es on ly becau se Ida ho pe rm it s p ub li c em

pl oyer pa yro ll de du ct io ns inth e fi rs t p la ce. . . . [T]he St at e’s res po ns e to th atpro bl em is li m it edto it s s ou rce— inth is 8cas e, po li ti cal pa yro ll de du ct io ns . The b anon su ch de du ct io ns pl ai nl y

se rv es th e St at e’s in te res t i n s ep arat in g p ub li c em pl oym en t fr om po li ti cal act iv it ie s. Id. at 3 61 , 12 9 S . Ct. at10 99 . Thu s, the qu es ti on be fo re thi s co urt i n t he pre se ntcas e tu rn s en ti rel y on ho w th e Actis in te rp ret ed . If itis m ean t o nl y to reac h p ayro ll de du ct io ns for or ga ni zat io ns en ga ge d i n e le ct io ne eri ng act iv it ie s s uc h a s tho se tar ge te d b y th e Id ah o s ta tu te at i ss ue in Y su rs a , th enitpre se nt s n o c on st itut io na l p ro bl em s. A 1 st atut e wit h abro ad er re ach m ay im pl ic at e Fi rs t Am en dm en t co nc ern s n ot ex pl or edin Y

su rs a . It h as lo ng be enou r pr act ic e th at“ [s ]ubs ta nt ia l d oubtab ou t a qu es ti on of s ta te law upo n wh ic h apa rti cu la r cas e tu rn s s ho ul d b e res ol ve d b y cert ifyin g t he qu es ti onto th e st at e supr em e co urt.” Jo ne s v. Di ll ar d’ s, In c. , 33 1 F.3 d 1 25 9, 1 26 8 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 3) (ci ti ng Mor en o v . Nat io nw ide In su r. Co . , 10 5 F.3 d 1 35 8, 1 36 0 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 7) ). Ther e is a hi gh li ke li ho odth atth e Supr em e Co urt o f Alaba m a’s in te rp ret at io n o f th e Actwil l re so lv e th is m at te r; t he refo re, the st at e co urts sh ou ldhave th e o pp ortu ni ty to ad dr es s t hi s i ss ue inth e fi rs t i ns ta nc e, pa rti cu la rly sin ce i t i s o ne so clo se ly tiedto st at ewid e p ol it ic al refo rm s. We

The I daho statute define s “political ac t ivity ” as “ele ctora l activities, independe nt 1 expenditures, or expenditures made to any candidate, political party , political action committee or political issues committee or in support of or ag ainst any ballot measure .” 55 5 U.S. 35 3 at 35 6, 129 S. Ct . at 1096. 9co nc lu de su ffi ci en t caus e ex is ts to cert ify a qu es ti on to th e Alaba m a Supr em e

Co urt wi thres pe ctto th e sc op e o f th e Act . CERTIFI CATION FROM THE UNITED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EL EVENTHCIRC UIT TO TH E SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA PURSUANT TO RULE 18 OF THE ALABAMA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA AND THE HON ORABLE JUSTIC ES THEREOF: AEA con te nd s t ha t Al ab am a ActNo. 2 01 0- 76 1 i nf rin ge s a b ro ad er ra ng e o f co ns ti tu ti on al ly pro te ct edact iv it y th anpre vi ou sl y

reco gn iz edas p erm is si bl e u nd er th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t. Sp eci fic al ly, AEA argu es th atth e Act ’s “ orot he rwis e” la ng ua ge wou ldpre ve ntgo ve rn m en t em pl oyees fr om

m ak in g c on tri bu ti on s t o a n or ga ni zat io n e ng ag edinpo li ti cal act iv ity th ro ug h a ny m ean s, i nc lu di ng pe rs on al do na ti on s o f th ei r own m on ey . AEA al so arg ue s tha t the term “po li ti cal act iv it y ” reac he s a wi de nu m

be r of il l-d efi ne d a ct iv it ie s, m ak in g i t i m po ss ib le foran y or ga ni zat io n t o c ert ify tha t i t i s i n c om pl ia nc e wit h t he Act. Th e st at e co un te rs th at“ orot he rwis e” s im

pl y pre ve nt s t he us e o f st at e res ou rces inan y way —wh ethe r th ro ug h s al ary de du ct io ns or s om e o th er s ta te m ech an is m —fr om

10be ne fit ti ng org an iz at io ns in vo lv edinpo li ti cal act iv it ie s. Th e st at e arg ue s t ha t

“po li ti cal act iv it y ” m ean s el ect io ne eri ng act iv it ie s. The in te rp ret at io n o f th e Actis a qu es ti on of s ta te law t ha t h as no t b een sp eci fic al ly addres se d b y th e Alaba m a Supr em e Co urt o r th e in te rm ed ia te st at e ap pe ll at e co urts . There fo re, we certi fy th e fo ll owi ng qu es ti on s t o t he Alab am a Supr em e Co urt: 1. Is th e “ orot he rwis e” l an gu ag e in th e st atut e li m it edto th e u se of s ta te m ech an is m s t o s up po rt p ol it ic al org an iz at io ns , or d oe s i t co ve r al l co nt rib ut io ns by stat e em pl oyees t o p ol it ic al org an iz at io ns , reg ard le ss of t he so ur ce? 2. Do es th e te rm

“po li ti cal act iv it y ” ref

er o nl y to ele ct io ne eri ng act iv it ie s? The an swe rs to th es e que st io ns wil l p erm itth is co urt t o a dd res s AEA’s co nc ern s an d d et erm in e whe th er the Act ru ns afo ul of t he Fir stAm en dm en t. To faci li ta te th e res ol ut io n o f th es e que st io ns , we di rectth e Cl erkto tra ns mitth e en ti re re co rdof t hi s ca se , to ge th er wi th co pi es of the parti es ’ br ie fs , to th e Alab am a Supr em e Co urt. Of co ur se , th e Alaba m a Supr em e Co urt i s i n n o way li mit edby our

qu es ti on s an d m ay

co ns id er the cas e as itsee s fi t. B. Narro win g t he Dis tri ctCo urt’s In jun ct io n.

11Altho ug h t he ul ti m at e res ol ut io n o f th is m at te r m ay de pe ndon th e Alaba m a Supr em e Co urt’s re so lu ti on of t he cert ifi edqu es ti on s, we b el ie ve itis ap pr op ria te to na rro w th e d is tri ctco urt’s i nju nc ti on inth e in te rim. In i ts m em or an du m op in io n, the di st ric t co urt i ss ue d apre li m in ary in jun ct io n b arri ng th e Act ’s en fo rcem en t in to to . Howev er, a s ta te ’s res tri ct io n o n p ayro ll de du ct io ns for or ga ni zat io ns en ga ge d i n e le ct io ne eri ng act iv it ie s wo ul d l ik el y be fou nd co ns ti tu ti on al un de r Y

su rs a . To th e ex te ntth e st at e li m it s i ts en fo rcem en t o f th e Act i n t hi s way, it m ay

pro ceed . The p rel im in ary in jun ct io n re m ai ns inpl ace a s t o en fo rcem en t tha t ex te nd s b ey on d t ha t ra ng e o f co nduc t. 2 IV. Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we d el ay fin al jud gm en t as to th e p rel im in ary in jun ct io n u nt il th e Alaba m a Supr em e Co urt h as ha d a n o pp ortuni ty to re nd er i ts in te rp ret at io n o f th e Act . QUEST IO NS CERTI FIED.

We also DI SMI SS the Governor of Alabama as a party to this appeal b ec au s e the district 2 court’s injunction did not apply to him. 12