United States Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc.
Issues
Under the First Amendment can the government require the foreign affiliates of domestic nongovernmental organizations to implement policies that explicitly oppose prostitution and sex trafficking in order for those organizations to receive government funds to fight HIV/AIDS abroad?
This case asks the Supreme Court to determine whether the government violates the First Amendment when it requires the foreign affiliates of U.S.-based nongovernmental organizations to adopt policies explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking in order to receive federal funding. The United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (the “Leadership Act”) authorizes federal funding for nongovernmental organizations to assist their worldwide campaigns against HIV/AIDS and other diseases. But the Act requires fund recipients to adopt a policy that explicitly opposes prostitution and sex trafficking (the “Policy Requirement”). The United States Agency for International Development (“USAID”) administers the Leadership Act and contends that requiring foreign affiliates to comply with the Policy Requirement does not violate the First Amendment rights of these domestic organizations. It explains that First Amendment rights do not extend to the foreign affiliates because foreign entities are not entitled to any First Amendment rights and are legally distinct from their domestic counterparts. The Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. (“AOSI”) counters that the Policy Requirement infringes on its First Amendment rights because it compels speech that is likely to be attributed to AOSI. The outcome of this case has heavy implications for the international network of welfare workers, as well as the government’s control on federal funding.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether—when in Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International Inc., the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment bars enforcement of Congress’ directive, which required respondents, United States-based organizations that receive federal funds to fight HIV/AIDS abroad, to “have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking” as a condition of accepting those funds—the First Amendment further bars enforcement of that directive with respect to legally distinct foreign entities operating overseas that are affiliated with respondents.
In 2003, Congress passed the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (the “Leadership Act”), codified at 22 U.S.C. § 7601, which authorized funding for nongovernmental organizations that fight HIV/AIDS and other diseases worldwide. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. v.
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Natalie Dickes: SCOTUS Update, American Bar Association (Jan. 14, 2020).
- Joseph Blocher: New Problems for Subsidized Speech, 56 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1083 (2015).
- Restrictions on the Speech of Recipients of Federal Funds Under the Leadership Act of 2003: United States Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society, EveryCRSReport (July 3, 2013).