Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International (2012)
- Docket
- 12-10
- Decided
- 2012-01-01
Summary
Question: Does a requirement that non-governmental organizations institute an explicit anti-prostitution policy in order to receive federal funding violate the First Amendment? Conclusion: Yes. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. delivered the majority opinion. The Court held 6-2 that the government may not use funding and the threat of the loss of funding as a method for the regulation of speech and policies of non-governmental organizations. Because the Act's funding provisions represent an ongoing condition on the actions of the group receiving funding, the provisions essentially act as government coercion. The Court held that the funding provisions require the groups to accept the beliefs of the government, which infringes on their First Amendment rights. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote a dissent in which he argued that the government has the right to choose to give financial support only to groups which share its views on how to address a particular issue. The fact that the government must often choose among many policy options does not mean that the government is coercing groups to adopt its views. Justice Clarence Thomas joined in the dissent. Justice Elena Kagan did not participate in the discussion or decision in this case.