Young Am's Found. v. Stenger

• Decision Date: 19 May 2023
• Docket Number: 3:20-CV-0822 (LEK/TWD)
• Parties: YOUNG AMERICA'S FOUNDATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. HARVEY STENGER, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York

1

YOUNG AMERICA'S FOUNDATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. HARVEY STENGER, et al., Defendants.

No. 3:20-CV-0822 (LEK/TWD)

United States District Court, N.D. New York

May 19, 2023

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER

LAWRENCE E. KAHN, United States District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Young America's Foundation (“YAF”), the Binghamton University College Republicans (“College Republicans”), and Jon Lizak (collectively “Original Plaintiffs”) brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(3), and 1986 against Harvey Stenger, Brian Rose, John Pelletier, the College Progressives, the Progressive Leaders of Tomorrow (“PLOT”), and the Student Association of Binghamton University (collectively, “Original Defendants”), alleging infringement of the Original “Plaintiffs' fundamental rights to free speech and equal protection of law by state actors on their own and in conspiracy with private actors.” Dkt. No. 1 (“Complaint”) ¶ 2.

On March 23, 2023, the Court granted Lizak's motion to voluntarily dismiss his claims against the Original Defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Dkt. No. 223 (“March 2023 Order”) at 15-16. However, the Court denied the Original Plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment against PLOT, an unincorporated association with no legal existence independent of its members. Id. at 18-22. Given PLOT's lack of independent legal existence, the Court sua sponte dismissed the claims against PLOT for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Id.

In the same order, the Court also sua sponte examined its subject matter jurisdiction over other claims in the action-namely, (1) all claims brought on behalf of the College Republicans, another unincorporated association, and (2) all of YAF and the College Republicans' (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) claims against the College Progressives, also an unincorporated association. Id. at 22-24. The Court ordered Plaintiffs to show cause as to why the Court should not sua sponte dismiss these two sets of claims for lack of Article III standing. Id.

Having reviewed the Complaint, Plaintiffs' memorandum of law to show cause, Dkt. No. 227 (“Plaintiffs' Response”), and the accompanying declaration, Dkt. No. 227-1 (“Declaration of Rein Bey” or “Bey Declaration”), the Court has determined that it retains Article III subject matter jurisdiction over the College Republicans' claims on behalf of its members against Stenger, Rose, Pelletier, and the Student Association of Binghamton University, but not over claims on behalf of the organization itself. Plaintiffs have also failed to show that the Court has Article III subject matter jurisdiction over their claims against the College Progressives. The Court therefore dismisses those claims and terminates the College Progressives as a defendant to this action. For related reasons set forth below, the Court also finds it necessary to vacate its prior order finding that non-party Masai Andrews is authorized to accept service on behalf of PLOT. See Dkt. No. 142 (“February 2022 Order”); Young America's Foundation v. Stenger, No. 20-CV-0822, 2022 WL 474152 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 16, 2022) (Kahn, J.).

II. BACKGROUND

A. The Parties

When the Original Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in July 2020, Jon Lizak was “a fulltime student at SUNY-Binghamton,” and was President of the College Republicans. Compl. ¶ 16. However, Lizak “stepped down as the [P]resident of the . . . College Republicans . . . in December 2021,” Dkt. No. 208-2 ¶ 2, and “graduated . . . in May 2022,” id. ¶ 4. With the Court's permission, Lizak voluntarily dismissed his claims against the Original Defendants in early 2023, and thus he is no longer a plaintiff to this action. Mar. 2023 Order at 15-16.

Lizak's dismissal left the College Republicans and YAF as the only remaining Plaintiffs. See Docket. The College Republicans are “an unincorporated association of SUNY-Binghamton students.” Compl. ¶ 12 (footnote omitted); Bey Decl. ¶ 5. “As of November 2019,” the College Republicans were “a fully chartered [SUNY-Binghamton] Registered Student Organization,” but after the events giving rise to the Complaint, the “College Republicans' full charter” was “revoked . . . and replaced . . . with a provisional charter.” Bey Decl. ¶¶ 12-13. As of April 2023, the College Republicans continue to operate at SUNY-Binghamton, where they “hold weekly meetings and routinely post flyers in connection with those weekly meetings.” Id. ¶ 6.

Plaintiff YAF, on the other hand, “is a nonprofit [501(c)(3)] organization,” headquartered in Virginia. Compl. ¶ 10; see also Internal Revenue Service, Tax Exempt Organization Search, https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/ (last visited May 19, 2023). YAF's “mission is to educate the public on the ideas of individual freedom, a strong national defense, free enterprise, and traditional values.” Compl. ¶ 10. “YAF partners with like-minded student organizations on university campuses to, among other things, co-host speakers.” Id. ¶ 11.

When they initiated suit in July 2020, the Original Plaintiffs named Harvey Stenger, Brian Rose, John Pelletier, the College Progressives, PLOT, and the Student Association of Binghamton University (“Student Association”) as the Original Defendants. See Compl. To date, all the Original Defendants have remained in the action except for PLOT, “a non-student group based in Binghamton, New York.” Id. ¶ 35; see Mar. 2023 Order at 22, 24 (sua sponte dismissing all claims brought against PLOT for lack of Article III subject matter jurisdiction).

Stenger, Rose, and Pelletier (collectively, “State Defendants”) are SUNY-Binghamton administrators. “Stenger is, and was at all times relevant to th[e] Complaint, the President of SUNY-Binghamton ....” Compl. ¶ 18. “Rose is, and was at all times relevant to th[e] Complaint, the Vice President for Student Affairs of SUNY-Binghamton . . . .” Id. ¶ 26. “Pelletier is, and was at all times relevant to th[e] Complaint, the Chief of UPD,” i.e., “the New York State University Police Department at Binghamton (‘UPD') . . . .” Id. ¶¶ 19, 30.

The Student Association “is a non-profit legal entity that has its offices within the University Union on SUNY-Binghamton's campus.” Id. ¶ 39. “The Student Association describes itself as ‘not only a forum for student activism, but the primary financial system which hundreds of clubs and student organizations receive their funding and legal protection through.'” Id. (footnote omitted). “The . . . administration permits the Student Association to operate with a limited degree of independence, but the administration retains the power to direct Student Association decisions.” Id. ¶ 40. “Acting at the direction of Stenger and Rose, the Student Association has the power to suspend and reinstate student organizations.” Id. (footnote omitted).

The College Progressives are “a registered student organization at SUNY-Binghamton and an unincorporated association of SUNY-Binghamton students.” Id. ¶ 33. When the Original Plaintiffs filed their Complaint, the College Progressives allegedly “ha[d] more than 100 members,” and “describe[d] themselves as a voice for progressive leftist politics on campus, as well as a center to concentrate activist conduct among students.” Id. ¶ 34 (footnote omitted). However, in August 2022, the attorney who appeared on behalf of the College Progressives in 2020, see Dkt. No. 29, represented that the group “is no longer an active organization at Binghamton University” and that he is not “aware of [any] former members who are still at the University or in the immediate area,” Dkt. No. 181 at 2.

B. The Original Plaintiffs' Allegations of Injury

The Original Plaintiffs' allegations of injury date back to October 2019, when “a Constitutions Assistant in the office of the Executive Vice President of the Student Association refused to grant official recognition to Young Americans for Freedom-a chapter of Plaintiff [YAF]-due to an anti-communism provision in the group's constitution that the Constitutions Assistant described as ‘problematic' ....” Compl. ¶ 42 (footnote omitted). “When YAF and Young Americans for Freedom pushed back on the Student Association's viewpoint discrimination, the Constitutions Assistant relented.” Id. ¶ 43.

“Soon thereafter, however, the Student Association alleged new deficiencies with the Young Americans for Freedom's request for recognition and demanded the group find a faculty sponsor or secure police presence at all of its campus events.” Id. “These new requirements- which the Student Association did not demand of any other student organization-were entirely manufactured as roadblocks to prevent Young Americans for Freedom from being recognized on campus due to their expressed ideological views.” Id.

The following month, “[o]n Thursday, November 14, 2019, [the] College Republicans organized a tabling event in a high-traffic area of SUNY-Binghamton's campus known as ‘the Spine.'” Id. ¶ 47. “As they (and many other student organizations) had done previously, [the] College Republicans did not obtain a permit from the Student Association to table on this date.” Id. ¶ 48. “This tabling event promoted an upcoming lecture by renowned economist and presidential advisor Dr. Arthur Laffer titled ‘Trump, Tariffs, and Trade Wars' that [the] College Republicans w[ere] co-hosting with YAF on Monday, November 18, 2019 (‘Dr. Laffer Event').” Id. ¶ 49.

After “close to three hours without incident . . . at approximately 1:30 [PM], a mob [comprised of the] College Progressives confronted [the] College Republicans over the content of their tabling.” Id. ¶¶ 50-51. The “College Progressives incited other members to join the mob by sending messages to group chatrooms with numerous other students.” Id. ¶ 51. These messages included:

“I heard

...