Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/13pdf/13-193_omq2.pdf
Page Number: 16.0

14 

SUSAN B. ANTHONY LIST v. DRIEHAUS 

Opinion of the Court 

C 

Finally,  the  threat  of  future  enforcement  of  the  false
statement statute is substantial.  Most obviously, there is
a history of past enforcement here: SBA was the subject of
a  complaint  in  a  recent  election  cycle.    We  have  observed 
that  past  enforcement  against  the  same  conduct  is  good
evidence  that  the  threat  of  enforcement  is  not  “ ‘ chimeri-
cal.’ ”  Steffel,  415  U. S.,  at  459;  cf.  Clapper,  568  U. S.,  at 
___  (slip  op.,  at  12)  (plaintiffs’  theory  of  standing  was 
“substantially  undermine[d]”  by  their  “fail[ure]  to  offer
any evidence that their communications ha[d] been moni-
tored”  under  the  challenged  statute).    Here,  the  threat  is 
even  more  substantial  given  that  the  Commission  panel 
actually found probable cause to believe that SBA’s speech
violated  the  false  statement  statute.    Indeed  future  com-
plainants may well “invoke the  prior probable-cause find-
ing to prove that SBA knowingly lied.”  Brief for Petition-
ers 32. 

The credibility of that threat is bolstered by the fact that 
authority  to  file  a  complaint  with  the  Commission  is  not
limited  to  a  prosecutor  or  an  agency.    Instead,  the  false 
statement  statute  allows  “any  person”  with  knowledge  of 
the  purported  violation  to  file  a  complaint.  §3517.153(A). 
Because  the  universe  of  potential  complainants  is  not
restricted to state officials who are constrained by explicit 
guidelines  or  ethical  obligations,  there  is  a  real  risk  of 
complaints  from,  for  example,  political  opponents.    See 
Brief  for  Michael  DeWine,  Attorney  General  of  Ohio,  as 
Amicus  Curiae  8  (hereinafter  DeWine  Brief);  see  also  id., 
at 6 (noting that “the Commission has no system for weed-
ing  out  frivolous  complaints”).    And  petitioners,  who  in-
tend  to  criticize  candidates  for  political  office,  are  easy 
targets.

Finally,  Commission  proceedings  are  not  a  rare  occur-
rence.  Petitioners  inform  us  that  the  Commission  “ ‘han-
dles about 20 to 80 false statement complaints per year,’ ”