Court Greenlights Campaign Finance Case Against Nonprofit in Georgia

Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr speaks during a news conference in Atlanta, on Sept. 5, 2023. (Natrice Miller/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP)

The state of Georgia can now proceed with its civil enforcement action against a nonprofit founded by former state representative and gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.

The appeals court on July 8 struck down a 2022 injunction blocking Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr from pursuing the state’s case against the New Georgia Project for suspected violations of state campaign finance laws.

In 2019, the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission opened an investigation into Ms. Abrams’s New Georgia Project and New Georgia Project Action Fund. At the time, the allegations included engaging in undisclosed election spending in 2018 and 2019, and illegally canvassing for Democratic candidates during the 2018 midterm elections.

The Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) and authorized to conduct some political activities. The New Georgia Project is a non-profit and risks losing its tax exempt status if it engages in partisan advocacy or endorses a candidate.

In its complaint, the Commission argued that the two operated effectively as one entity, failed to register as a super PAC, or committee independent of candidates and their official campaign committees, and disclose electioneering expenses. A formal hearing held by the Commission on Aug. 1, 2022, found reasonable grounds to conclude that state campaign finance disclosure laws were violated.

Officials from the New Georgia Project and New Georgia Project Action Fund have denied any wrongdoing and sued to stop the enforcement in August 2022. A key argument was that two of the State’s campaign finance laws were unconstitutional violations of the First Amendment. A lower federal district court agreed and, in September 2022, blocked the State from enforcing the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance on the grounds it was unconstitutional.

Court of Appeals Judges Rule Lower Court Should Have Abstained

Circuit Judges Kevin Newsom, Robin Rosenbaum, and Stanley Marcus ruled the lower district court judge should have abstained from taking up the case because the State’s investigation was still ongoing, citing Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37.

In Younger v. Harris, the United States Supreme Court ruled federal courts were required to abstain from hearing any civil claims resulting from an ongoing prosecution. The case can only be heard after the person or entity is convicted or found not guilty, unless the defendant will suffer an irreparable injury from a delay.

In the Circuit Court of Appeals opinion, written by Judge Newsom, the judges said it’s for this reason that the injunction is being lifted. They did not rule on the argument that the State’s campaign finance laws are unconstitutional.

“The State had been investigating New Georgia for years and recommended enforcement weeks before New Georgia filed its federal suit,” Judges Newsom said.

“Accordingly, we will vacate and remand on that ground, without addressing the merits of New Georgia’s First Amendment challenge.”

In a July 8 press release, Attorney General Chris Carr said he intends to pursue this case to the full extent of the law.

“This decision is a victory for transparency in campaign finance,” he said.

“Rather than simply comply with Georgia law, New Georgia Project chose years of costly litigation and lost. These rules apply to everyone, and we will ensure they are upheld.”

The Epoch Times has contacted the New Georgia Project and New Georgia Project Action Fund for comment on this latest ruling.