Alliance For Open Society International - Lawsuit

Lawsuit

In September 2005, AOSI sued the United States Agency for International Development and other U.S. Government agencies in response to the anti-prostitution pledge that was a component of HIV/AIDS policy during the George W. Bush administration being extended to include non-profit organizations based in the United States. As described by the online magazine Medical News Today:

At issue in the case is a requirement that public health groups receiving U.S. funds pledge their "opposition to prostitution" in order to continue their life-saving HIV prevention work. Under this "pledge requirement," recipients of U.S. funds are forced to censor even their privately funded speech regarding the most effective ways to engage high-risk groups in HIV prevention.

Just prior to this case, the non-profit organization DKT International had brought a similar lawsuit that prevailed in District Court but lost on appeal at the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The February 2007 ruling was based on the assumption that the government would allow speech regarding prostitution as long as it is done through an affiliate that doesn't receive federal funding.

With the backing of the American Civil Liberties Union, AOSI sued the United States Agency for International Development, the financial backers of its Central Asian drug rehabilitation programs. Co-plaintiffs were the Open Society Institute and Pathfinder International. Lawyers from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law represented the plaintiffs.

In May 2006, Judge Victor Marrero, a federal judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, issued a preliminary injunction against requiring these organizations to sign the anti-prostitution pledge. Ruling that such a sweeping restriction on the privately funded speech of groups violates the First Amendment, Marrero wrote "The Supreme Court has repeatedly found that speech, or an agreement not to speak, cannot be compelled or coerced as a condition of participation in a government program."

The government appealed the case to the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. During the oral arguments in the case, the government stated that it would allow legally and physically separate affiliates to engage in the prohibited speech. The government issued guidelines to this effect in July 2007. In November 2007, the Appeals Court let the preliminary injunction stand and returned the case for trial to the District Court, where it is currently pending.