Page 58 - 2022augustBOG

Case 2:19-cv-11962-LMA-JVM Document 106 Filed 08/08/22 Page 30 of 33

88
or refers the matter to arbitration. Historically, all timely objections have resulted

89
in refunds.
The issue of whether the LSBA provides its members with adequate notice of

its activities is a closer question. The LSBA notifies members about the adoption of

90
legislative positions via emailed “Bar Briefs.” The LSBA also publishes audited
annual reports each year providing information on its use of mandatory dues and

other revenue, and it has begun to provide prospective budgets for the
91
92
coming year.

The cover sheet accompanying the prospective budget for 2022-23 states that

“[t]he expenditure of funds by the LSBA is limited as set forth in the LSBA’s Articles

and Bylaws; Supreme Court Rule XVIII § 6; Keller v. State Bar of California,

93
496 U.S. 1 (1990); and McDonald v. Longley, 4 F.4th 229 (5th Cir. 2021). It also

provides the Treasurer’s email address, and advises that members can contact the

Treasurer with any questions about the budget. Finally, the cover sheet explains
94

that an escrow amount can be based on actual anticipated expenditures for non-core
activities”). However, now that the LSBA maintains a policy of engaging only in
germane speech, it is not possible for the LSBA to prospectively identify non-germane
expenses. Therefore, this type of escrow requirement “would not further minimize
risk of infringement because, unlike in Hudson, the allegedly impermissible speech
is only identifiable after the fact.” Crowe, 989 F.3d at 726.
88 Defs. Exh. 60.

89 Larsen at 174:23-175:2.
90 Ponder at 146:6-9; Defs. Exh. 26.
91 Larsen at 184:16-20; Defs. Exh. 58.
92 Defs. Exh. 73.
93 Id. at 1.
94 Id.

30