context: In Secretary of State v. Joseph H. The Court reasoned that, as a result of the statute, charities were reluctant to contract with the plaintiff because it charged fees in excess of 25% and that the plaintiffs impetus to challenge the statute was therefore consonant with the charities' First Amendment interests.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 259 F.3d 996, 1010-11
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that the owner of an adult entertainment establishment had overbreadth standing to pursue a First Amendment challenge against provisions of an ordinance that required the employees of such establishments to obtain a license because the licensing scheme -- although not directly applicable to the owner -- threatened his business's viability
citation_a.sentence: Id. at 958, 104 S.Ct. 2839 (“The activity sought to be protected is at the heart of the business relationship between Munson and its clients, and Munson’s interests in challenging the statute are completely consistent with the First Amendment interests of the charities it represents.”); see also Clark v. City of Lakewood, 259 F.3d 996, 1010-11 (9th Cir.2001) (holding that the owner of an adult entertainment establishment had overbreadth standing to pursue a First Amendment challenge against provisions of an ordinance that required the employees of such establishments to obtain a license because the licensing scheme — although not directly applicable to the owner — threatened his business’s viability).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.parenthetical: "The activity sought to be protected is at the heart of the business relationship between Munson and its clients, and Munson's interests in challenging the statute are completely consistent with the First Amendment interests of the charities it represents."
citation_b.sentence: Id. at 958, 104 S.Ct. 2839 (“The activity sought to be protected is at the heart of the business relationship between Munson and its clients, and Munson’s interests in challenging the statute are completely consistent with the First Amendment interests of the charities it represents.”); see also Clark v. City of Lakewood, 259 F.3d 996, 1010-11 (9th Cir.2001) (holding that the owner of an adult entertainment establishment had overbreadth standing to pursue a First Amendment challenge against provisions of an ordinance that required the employees of such establishments to obtain a license because the licensing scheme — although not directly applicable to the owner — threatened his business’s viability).