Document: 467 U.S. 947 104 S.Ct. 2839 81 L.Ed.2d 786 SECRETARY OF STATE MARYLAND, Petitionerv.JOSEPH H. MUNSON COMPANY, INC. No. 82-766. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Oct. 31, 1983. Decided June 26, 1984. Syllabus A Maryland statute prohibits a charitable organization, in connection with any fundraising activity, from paying expenses more than 25% amount raised, but authorizes waiver this limitation where it would effectively prevent organization raising contributions. Respondent is professional fundraiser whose customers include various chapters Fraternal Order Police, at least one whom was reluctant to contract respondent because statute's percentage limitation. brought suit Circuit for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that regularly charges an FOP chapter excess limitation, petitioner Secretary State had informed if refused comply be prosecuted, violated its right free speech under First Fourteenth Amendments. Without addressing petitioner's argument lacked standing assert claims, upheld statute, Special Appeals affirmed. The reversed, holding challenge facial validity, unconstitutional, flaws were not remedied by provision. Held: 1. has statute. Not only does satisfy "case" or "controversy" requirement Art. III, suffered both threatened actual injury as result there also no prudential reason against allowing Where claim overly broad violation Amendment, allowed party rights another without regard ability other his own claim. activity sought protected heart business relationship between customers, respondent's interests challenging are completely consistent Amendment charities represents. Petitioner's concern should have overbroad demonstrated overbreadth "substantial," properly reserved determination on merits. Pp. 954-959. 2. Regardless provision, unconstitutionally overbroad, restriction solicitation being unconstitutional activity. Schaumburg v. Citizens Better Environment, 444 620, 100 826, 63 73. 959-970. (a) provision save Charitable organizations high administrative costs due information dissemination, discussion, advocacy public issues, rather fraud, remain barred carrying those activities. 962-964. (b) This "substantial overbreadth" case plaintiff must demonstrate "as applied" him unconstitutional. Here core easily identifiable constitutionally proscribable conduct prohibits. cannot distinguish fund-raising activities flaw simply includes some impermissible applications all operates fundamentally mistaken premise accurate measure fraud. Where, here, imposes direct defect means chosen accomplish State's objectives too imprecise, so creates unnecessary risk chilling speech, subject attack. 964-968. (c) Whether regulates before- after-the-fact immaterial. charity prevented engaging lack permit knowledge illegal chill same. facts restricts may elect whether bound prior year apply campaign-by-campaign basis, do nothing alter fact significant And just door-to-door solicitation, remedy promotes peripherally. 968-970. 294 Md. 160, 448 A.2d 935, Diana Gribbon Motz, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baltimore, Md., petitioner. Yale L. Goldberg, Rockville, respondent. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion Court. 1 In 73 (1980), Court, dissenting vote, concluded municipal ordinance prohibiting contributions did use 75% receipts "charitable purposes" issue present like provisions render "flexible" ordinance, can withstand constitutional that, even increased flexibility, We agree conclusion affirm judgment Appeals. 2 * Joseph Munson Co., Inc. (Munson), Indiana corporation, instituted action Anne Arundel County, seeking relief (Secretary). for-profit promoting events giving advice how conducted. Its Police (FOP). 3 Section 103A et seq., 41, Md.Ann.Code (1982),1 organizations. 103D such agreeing pay raised.2 complaint alleged gross raised event promotes. App. 4. § prosecuted failed 5. 4 initial complaint, filed March 7, 1978, took position contracts seq. dismissed failure exhaust remedies. court concluded, however, could attack statutes improper delegation legislative authority, Constitution. 13. then amended allege effected infringement assembly Amendments Id., 26. 5 questioned Munson's claims. He urged directed acts and, therefore, kind constitutionality. claims presented controversy, remedies consequently, been binding contracts. 29. 6 address argument, Pet. Cert. 38a. It included authorizing "in instances contributions," sufficiently flexible accommodate legitimate interests. 46a. rejected state-law authority. 7 appealed Maryland. take cross-appeal. affirmed 48 Md.App. 273, 426 985 (1981). 8 Both petitioned writs certiorari. challenged validity standing. granted petitions unanimous reversed 935 (1982). expressed doubt about Secretary's when taken appeal Court's judgment, but, assuming before court, nonetheless 103D. found based allegations stipulated trial see 39a, clearly 103D.3 contention chapters, noting persons relationship, impairs normally accorded 171, A.2d, 941. addition, held, U.S., 634, S.Ct., 834 "[g]iven litigant unprotected nevertheless showing substantially abridges parties court." 172, 942. 9 On merits, required ruled valid require imposed criminal penalties 176-179, 944-945. whenever 179-181, 945-946. statutory authorization exemption "extremely narrow." inherent costs—that make policy decision proceeds purposes "charitable" denied their so, lumped together 180-181, 946. sum, view Appeals, addressed Schaumburg, "narrowly drawn regulatio[n] designed serve [the legitimate] unnecessarily interfering freedoms." 637, 836. 10 certiorari review determinations namely, 103D, face. 459 1102, 103 722, 74 949 (1983). II 11 Standing. first element inquiry III Singleton Wulff, 428 106, 112, 96 2868, 2873, 49 826 (1976).4 company. Because call payment funds given event, subject, 103L, civil restraint liability. Prior initiation lawsuit, prosecuted. Montgomery County Chapter enter into See supra; Simon Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization, 1917, 450 (1976); Linda R.S. Richard D., 410 614, 617, 93 1146, 1148, 35 536 (1973). 12 addition limitations III's case-or-controversy requirement, considerations limit challenges courts willing hear. "[T]he generally legal interests, rest third parties." Warth Seldin, 422 490, 499, 95 2197, 2205, 45 343 (1975) (citing Tileston Ullman, 318 44, 493, 87 L.Ed. 603 (1943); Raines, 362 17, 80 519, 524 (1960); Barrows Jackson, 346 249, (1953)). rule twofold. "frees pronouncement premature interpretations areas application might cloudy," 22, 523, assures issues will concrete sharply presented.5 Baker Carr, 369 186, 204, 82 691, 703, 663 (1962). infringed statute.6 Accordingly, insists heard complain charitable-solicitation violates Amendment. 13 concedes, situations competing outweigh rationale third-party standing, relaxed prudential-standing concerns present. practical obstacles asserting behalf itself, example, recognized doctrine jus tertii situation, considers sufficient injury-in-fact whether, matter, reasonably expected frame them necessary adversarial zeal. See, e.g., Craig Boren, 429 190, 193-194, 97 451, 454-455, 50 397 (1976). 14 Within context enunciated justify lessening Even actually engaged possibility punishment he refrain further Society whole loser. Thus, danger adjudication avoided possible outweighed society's interest having challenged. "Litigants, permitted expression violated, judicial prediction assumption very existence cause others expression." Broadrick Oklahoma, 413 601, 612, 2908, 2916, 37 830 (1973).7 15 instant case, most serious bring lawsuit. Although defeat party's outside context, dispositive determining exists allegedly chills speech. To contrary, " 'with person making regulated requisite narrow specificity.' quoting Dombrowski Pfister, 380 479, 486, 85 1116, 1121, 22 (1965). ("Given court"). 16 charity, restrict analysis. Facial primarily benefit litigant, society—to court. function stake. crucial satisfies "injury-in-fact," satisfactorily case. If need charity. not, 17 concedes met, Tr. Oral Arg. 5, come forward why inadequate advocate charities' rights. clients, allow 18 Besides "noncharity" claim, urges "substantial." 615, 2917. raises point concern. indicated "strong medicine" invoked last resort." 613, 2916. concern, "substantially overbroad" struck down face "standing" question extent prevail merits applied it, others, Parker Levy, 417 733, 760, 94 2547, 2563, 41 439 (1974); 21, 522. Monaghan, Overbreadth, 1981 S.Ct.Rev. therefore move 19 Merits. supra, every which utilized obtainable '[s]atisfactory proof seventy-five percent solicitations used directly purpose organization.' 624, 829. us distinctions acceptable. answer question, we reexamine bases reached Schaumburg. A. 20 determined intertwined they entitled protections Amendment: 21 "Prior authorities, establish appeals funds, street door door, involve variety interests—communication information, dissemination propagation views ideas, causes—that within protection Soliciting financial support undoubtedly reasonable regulation latter undertaken reality characteristically informative perhaps persuasive particular causes economic, political, social flow likely cease." 632, 833.8 restricted ways engage "direct substantial sustained unless serves strong, subordinating Village protect." 636, order valid, [the] interes[t] 23 protecting crime, undue annoyance, precisely tailored accommodating Village's asserted peripherally promoted served measures less intrusive prohibition solicitation. 24 particular, although primary preventing imprecise instrument purpose. justification using fundraising, salaries, overhead charitable, commercial, enterprise. Any enterprise represented itself thus fraudulent. 25 assumption, recognized, fraud costs. number factors costs; important these often combining prohibiting. light accommodated solicitation,9 insufficiently related governmental interference speech.10 B 26 left open now Court—whether deficiencies expended necessity. distinguished upheld, National Foundation Fort Worth, 415 F.2d (CA5 1969), cert. denied, 396 1040, 90 688, 684 (1970), opportunity costs, though high, reasonable. 635, n. 9, 835, 9. 27 similar Worth ordinance. directs "issue rules regulations total income contributions." 2, supra. Having considered conclude 28 exception narrow," confined "where 180, 946, avail attributable decisions inability raise funds. Under Appeals' interpretation, discretion determine reasons necessity warrant waiver. help chooses, disseminate part fundraising. 'information issues,' "11 Environment 590 220, 225 (CA7 1978), activities.12 C 29 limited strike because, longer overbroad." persuaded. 30 "Substantial criterion avoid striking manner. appropriate cases where, despite possibly application, 'remainder . covers range conduct. .' CSC Letter Carriers, 548, 580-581, 2880, 2897-2898, 796 (1973)." 2563. New York Ferber, 458 747, 770, 25, 102 3348, 3362, 1113 774, 3364. 31 case.13 While prohibited, sweep applications, fraud.14 That prevents misdirection organization's purported goal little fortuitous.15 equally results charity's proves unpopular. hand, indulges misdirecting either restricting done 32 activity,16 836; Bank Boston Bellotti, 435 765, 786, 98 1407, 1421, 55 707 (1978). Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. Public Service Comm'n N.Y., 447 557, 565, 8, 2343, 2351, 65 341 (1980); City Council Los Angeles Taxpayers Vincent, 466 789, 800, 19, 2118, 2126, 772 (1984) ("[W]here unquestionably attaches sanctions conduct, likelihood deter ordinarily great attack," citing Erznoznik Jacksonville, 205, 217, 2268, 2277, 125 (1975)). 33 decrease fundamental defect. regardless requires rejected. IV 34 Our altered presence points out, impose An register solicit demonstrating said, after fact. unmoved claimed distinction. As noted, several elements regulatory scheme suggest "before-the-fact" agreement shall 103F, begin until "shall approve registration" counsel solicitor. fundraiser's registration she finds conformity requirements subtitle well Secretary. 36 More important, makes difference Chaplinsky Hampshire, 315 568, 572, 3, 62 766, 769, 86 1031 (1942). out multitude spent purpose, basis. Those distinctions, mean many They 38 Finally, distinction made aimed something else hope during process. aim improved fires targets. 39 overbroad. 40 ordered. STEVENS, concurring. 42 With increasing frequency seems prone disregard highest arise federal system. discussion majority dissent illustrates point. 43 What loosely described encompasses three distinct questions: (1) Is dispute Co. meaning Constitution; (2) "prudential reasons" refusing base applies company's potential clients; (3) proper analysis? comes critical significance respect two importance third. separate questions, merit discussion. 44 jurisdictional sense. appears issue.1 course, relates jurisdiction bearing courts. Nothing Federal Constitution rendering advisory concerning constitutionality legislation so.2 decide power review. persuaded duty dismiss writ effect. No Member argues follow course. Since law, difficult perceive relevance Framers elected give judiciary "roving commission" opinions. Post, 976.3 events, real 46 issue. correctly notes, constraints jurisdiction, "developed, governance confessedly series passing upon large questions pressed decision." Ashwander TVA, 297 288, 346, 56 466, 482, 688 (1936) (Brandeis, J., concurring). rules, state 47 parties, ante, 955, post, 977, judge rule. Rules fashion our governance, indeed exercise supervisory powers over judges, necessarily applicable work judges. judges may, so. Instead, I believe adopt differ ours—and surely latitude attacks laws consider appropriate. deny fund raiser basis impact arising perfectly hear unwilling listen arguments arguments. quite clear me analysis discretionary jurisdiction.4 If, implies,5 advance type, course dismissal improvidently granted. my opinion, while never issued finding "third-party" matter stake outcome individuals degree nature infringed. 51 contend threat. threat relevant, assessing litigate purposes. actually, indirectly, injured effect clients enough, alone, recognizes pinpoints "activity represents." Ante, 958. assure vigorously providing decision-making. coming actions district entertain. 52 Once follows ground assert. argue record successful appear redress injury. grounds. relevant consideration well. construe ourselves, compare 984, 5; authoritatively construction greatly aids question. court's illegitimate turns quantitative assessment future applicatons 53 summary, am declined granting "Munson 103D", 954—I concur opinion. 54 REHNQUIST, THE CHIEF JUSTICE, POWELL, O'CONNOR join, dissenting. Four Terms ago, Illinois, prohibited "the 75 'charitable purposes,' defined exclude expenses, overhead, expenses." 622, 828, (1980). Today, authority decision, strikes markedly different prohibit fundraisers charging fee raised. invoking "overbreadth," reaches behest affected organization. Believing merely medicine," (1973), "bad dissent. Recently, reaffirmed commitment "[t]he traditional rule" except rarest circumstances, "a conceivably Court." 767, 3360, (1982).1 keeping system roving commission "to survey books pass called enforce them." Younger Harris, 401 37, 52, 91 746, 754, 669 (1971). Constitutional Convention specifically proposal Members pending legislation. M. Ferrand, Records 1787, p. (1911). through "case controversy" resolution disputes them. Musings hypothetical fitting classroom statehouse, neither wise nor permissible courtroom. 57 declare law depends "flesh-and-blood" conflict superior Chief Marshall explained Marbury Madison, Cranch [5 U.S.] 137, 178, 60 (1803): 58 "So opposition constitution; constitution conformably disregarding constitution, law; conflicting governs essence duty." (Emphasis added.) 59 corollary principle personal vicariously. McGowan Maryland, 366 420, 429-430, 1101, 1106-1107, 393 (1961). When him. activities, seeks regulate, prevails, invalidates toto, refined case-by-case meantime, underlying still enforcement bounds. challenge, suspends entirely. however substantial, negated rewritten legislature "reinterpreted" authorized narrowly. forestall law. 61 advantages approach obvious. prerogative disruptive reach Such allows infirmities. 768, 3360. sound data adequate judgment. focus otherwise abstract amorphous decide. "Facts again decisive." Frankfurter Landis, Note Advisory Opinions, Harv.L.Rev. 1002, 1005 (1924). One original ever allowed, Declaratory Judgment Act availability preliminary usually discover scope afforded subjecting himself prosecution. Be indicate sparingly. "[W]e 'strong medicine' employed hesitation, 'only resort.' 3361 (quoting 2916). insisted "substantial" relation invalidated "[P]articularly involved," Broadrick, 2917, hesitant paralyze efforts solely predictions chill. These special force functions economic setting fees charged fundraisers. are, altogether Schaumburg's provided "[e]very solicits intends village streets ways, permit." Code, Ch. 22-20 (1975). contain "[s]atisfactory per cent organization." 22-20(g). Excluded definition purpose" expenses. Ibid. 64 controlling internal workings Village, prime failing "organizations research, advocacy, education paid staff carry support." impossible qualify permit. Maryland's external, relations 103F Secretary, furnish certain annual fee, file bond all, subtitle, including provides part: 66 "(a) received ." 67 who themselves read conjunction firm charge. governing, employment agency judged approved minimum rationality standard traditionally regulations. Ohralik Ohio Bar Assn., 436 447, 460, 1912, 1920, (1978); Williamson Lee Optical 348 483, 461, 99 563 (1955). Of ceiling incidental indirect expression—as would, placed literary agents—in marginal producers forced market. words, price controls tend services available, much rent control thought rental housing available. But strict scrutiny. Otherwise, national forest suspect tending quantity paper. 68 subjected heightened scrutiny, insure solicited excessively diverted private pecuniary gain. process, encourage confidence money kept moderate limits coincide contributors' expectations go There "fraud" soliciting "for" small fraction collected.2 fully disclose donor half collected "expenses," common-law sense word, end. incurring excessive disclosed donors protects overcharged unscrupulous 69 "there prohibits." 965-966. rates "easily identifiable" "constitutionally proscribable." organizations, easy constitutional. 70 extent, intense 833. charities, insofar advocacy. Again, enhanced regulation, intended objects public's bounty benefited. then, statute—the infringe expression—is plainly sweep. 71 today echoes incur higher essential manner educational goals. 963-964. Unlike founded baldly claiming "remain activities," 964, ignores slights differences 72 calculation 103D(a). salaries researchers, policymakers technical staff, general count "[O]rganizations spend amounts expenses," 638, 837, largely unaffected obviously pertinent reportedly 23.3% 1975 21.5% administration. 1976, figures 16.5%, respectively. 626, 830. readily carefully Second, 103D(b) excludes associated combined section provides: "(b) For section, adjusted equal cost goods, food, entertainment, drink sold public, postage Postal printing expense contributions, costs." unlike receptions, picnics seek converts calculus. Nor mailing literature. Sections 103D(a) eliminate 76 Third, said suffice alleviate "unpopular" precluded soliciting. 967. unable meet unpopularity exemption.3 77 mingle fall exceptions 103D(b), pro rata allocation portion portion. 78 "The shall, accordance 'standard accounting fiscal reporting voluntary health welfare organizations' provide not." 79 member organization,4 involves support, entirely fundraising.5 correct, all. Expenses excluded know chance situations. foolish four safeguards ensure way improperly inhibit bears absolute guarantee always bounds; demanded. remember, noted above condemned minimize overbreadth. extensive who, Munson, advocating causes, concluding offer believe. misunderstands speculate applied. Unfortunately, misunderstanding ungrounded speculation natural hazards sights focused specific set facts, vision sadly deficient. Effective July 1, 1984, Legislature revised 1984 Md.Laws, ch. 787. changes definitional affect reads full: salvage cost, not. subsection compensation fund-raiser conducting feasibility studies undertake planning "(c) Every solicitor writing, copy ten days entered solicitations." Other intending statement finances, 103B, 103F. 103L(a) subjects liability wilfully violating requirements. final Munson. here. determination. Nevertheless, ourselves met. Doremus Board Education, 342 429, 434, 394, 397, 475 (1952). formulations illustrate, second factor counseling separable "sufficiently controversy." add minima healthy someone aimed, abstract, generalized grievance equipped advised adjudicate. 500, (1975); Schlesinger Reservists Stop War, 418 208, 217-222, 2925, 2930-2933, 706 (1974). intruded Now, focuses charities. disposition occasion unprotected. Times Sullivan, 376 254, 266, 84 710, 718, 686 (1964). Bates Arizona, 433 350, 380, 2691, 2707, 810 (1977) ("The reflects harm society unpunished muted"); Eisenstadt Baird, 405 438, 445, 92 1029, 1034, 349 (1972) (in able rights, litigation interests"); id., ("Indeed, intolerable, inhibitory freedom E.g., Thornhill Alabama, 310 88, 97-98, 736, 741-742, 1093 (1940). (1960)"). types encompass protection. defines "solicit" request, money, credit, property, credit card contribution assistance form plea representation includes: "(1) oral written request; "(2) announcement news media campaign "(3) distribution, circulation, posting, publishing handbill, advertisement, publication which, implication, purposes; "(4) sale of, attempt sell, advertising space, book card, tag, coupon, device, magazine, membership, subscription, ticket, admission, chance, merchandise, tangible item (i) purposes, (ii) name referred inducement purchase, (iii) deemed place request made, receives contribution." 103A(i). instance, punish disclosure finances contribute. 637-638, 836-837. safety residential privacy. goals better furthered interest—such convicted felons solicitors homeowners post signs barring property. 638-639, 01.02.04.04A(3) Code Regulations (1983) materials appeal, implied, allocated clarity absence indication wonder dissent's exempted reach. gives envisioned. cap "expenses activity" purposes." nn. interpreting apparently presumption exempted. notion sounds appealing, "reality," Written materials, official responsibility allocated, publications licensed, infra. disagrees interpretation her discretion. She grant "whenever necessary" extremely liberal manner, care shown groups." Brief Petitioner 33. second-guess enough exemptions necessary," find slightly troubling. "license" ideas inherently suspect. By placing hands license, censorship 97, 741, L.Ed (1940); Schneider State, 308 147, 146, 155 (1939); Lovell Griffin, 303 444, 666, 668, (1938). 640-643, 837-839 (dissenting opinion). abridged traded licensing available unguided State. Particularly poorly suited accomplishing goal, alternative same straining dispensation dissenters radical departure practice cases. 977-978. earlier Term, repeatedly "on face" apparent "would create unacceptable suppression ideas." 797, 2125, (1984). Stromberg California, 283 359, 532, 1117 (1931); 3360 (1982); Freedman 51, 734, 649 (1965); Teitel Film Cusack, 390 139, 88 966 (1968); Saia York, 334 558, 1574 (1948); Cantwell Connecticut, 296, 900, 1213 Hague CIO, 307 496, 516, 954, 83 1423 (1939) (plurality refining contexts Kolender Lawson, 461 352, 1855, 903 (1983); Smith Goguen, 566, 1242, 605 (1974) (vagueness statute); Sniadach Family Finance Corp., 395 337, 89 1820, (1969) (due process garnishment Lanzetta Jersey, 306 618, 888 statute). loath admit infirmities Cf. 216, 2276, overlook "overbreadth" describe "Overbreadth" employ narrowly compelling interest. 637-639, 836-837; Zwickler Koota, 389 241, 250, 391, 396, (1967). supra (recognizing suggesting "overbreadth"); (1980) (same). "facial" falls short demands. dissenters' chip away dispositive—that legislature's announced enacting 1976 revision Md.Ann.Code, "assure purpose." Preamble 679. mismanagement remains. tool achieve records illustrate tenuous low endeavor. Between October 14, 1980, 29, 1982, lowest contemplated 48% receipts. Five 70% 77.1%. Another five 80% 85%. lodges FOP; Exhibits A.6. suggestion fundraisers, perplexing. 978-980. labeled "economic regulation." 635-636, 835-836. Whatever remains reasons, "simply misses point" proportion 980, "purpose" education. fraudulent itself. directly, lacks ode seem totally gratuitous what agrees express want jurisdiction. Indeed, indicates unclear waived practice, 168-170, 940-941 (1982), 8a-10a, hence suggests At outset reminded judgments prematurely, "[m]usings" regarding "hypothetical" "may courtroom." 2857. controversy crime "regulated organizations," 981—no exists. dissent, ignoring wisdom espoused early statute: constitutional." revealing cites major abstention (1971), discussing 976. hodgepodge entertaining abstain exercising it. unwise vehicle adjudicating presented. Uplinger, 246, 2332, 2334, 201 (STEVENS, adjudicate confident violate 522, Carmichael Southern Coal Coke 301 495, 513, 868, 874, 1245 (1937); Yazoo M.V.R. Jackson Vinegar 226 219-220, 40, 40-41, 193 (1912); Supervisors Stanley, Otto 305, 311-315, 105 1044 (1882); Austin Aldermen, Wall. [74 694, 698-699, 224 (1869). dismisses observation [an organization] funds." abscond South America collected. Rather, betrays thinks solicited. acknowledges statute," feels "does defect." 968. legitimately Properly viewed, "bona fide salaried officer employee maintains permanent office State." 103A(g). rightly 963, 11, "an scheme. yet tested rate, failings passed pursuant far drastic solution be, regulation.

Category: 2