Opinion ID: 151308
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Stilp's Prior Ethics Act Petition

Text: In November 2007, Stilp prepared an Ethics Act complaint alleging the improper use of public funds for political purposes by a prominent member of the state legislature. Before filing the complaint, Stilp issued a press release stating that the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission will be asked to investigate the use of taxpayer funds for political purposes. The contracts totaled $290,000 during 2007. [T]he complaint is attached. Stilp's press release successfully attracted media attention; at least three separate news articles reported the allegations asserted in his complaint. The Ethics Commission, however, declined to open an investigation and summarily dismissed Stilp's complaint one day after filing. Unfortunately for Stilp, the publicity caused by his press release led the Investigative Division of the Ethics Commission to open an inquiry into whether Stilp had violated Section 1108(k). By letter of January 31, 2008, defendant Contino summarized the alleged violation: That Eugene Stilp, a (private citizen) violated [Section 1108(k)] when he publicly disclosed or caused to be disclosed that a complaint against a public official had been filed with the Commission by disclosing or acknowledging to other persons information relating to a complaint he was filing or filed with the State Ethics Commission regarding the conduct of The Majority Leader of The House Democratic Caucus by providing copies of the complaint to the media. . . . On December 4, 2008, Stilp settled the matter by consent decree, admitting a violation of Section 1108(k) and paying a civil fine of $500. In its written adjudication, the Ethics Commission emphasized that Stilp violated Section 1108(k) by announcing his intention to file an Ethics Act complaint: [T]he prohibition of Section 1108(k) of the Ethics Act encompasses a complaint that will be pending before the Commission. This action, brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserts a facial challenge to the constitutionality of Section 1108(k). Stilp seeks declaratory and injunctive relief rendering the confidentiality provisions of Section 1108(k) unconstitutional and unenforceable on grounds that they abridge the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Stilp wishes to file additional complaints under the Ethics Act, and to do so publicly, but fears civil sanction or criminal prosecution for violating Section 1108(k). Stilp, however, does not challenge the Ethics Commission's December 4, 2008, adjudication. The District Court, following an evidentiary hearing at which Stilp and Contino testified, held that Stilp had satisfied the requirements for preliminary injunctive relief and issued an order enjoining defendants from enforcing § 1108(k) against a complainant that discloses the fact that he or she filed a complaint with the Commission. Defendants appealed.