“We find the denials in the deposition and affidavits significant,” the Eleventh Circuit noted in its opinion. “The district court’s ruling, considering this evidence, runs contrary to the instructions provided by Rule 56, which state that summary judgment may only be granted where there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact.”
Jurisdictional Arguments and FEC Procedures
Rivera reiterated his arguments that the federal court did not have jurisdiction in the matter because Congress only authorizes courts to intervene in Federal Election Campaign Act enforcement cases that the FEC is unable to resolve after attempting conciliation. According to Rivera, the FEC did not follow mandatory pre-suit procedures, including notifying Rivera’s attorney of its probable cause finding and providing a proposed conciliation agreement. This procedural oversight, Rivera argued, undermined the FEC’s ability to bring the case to court.
Background of the Campaign Finance Allegations
The FEC’s complaint accused Rivera of secretly funneling approximately $76,000 in contributions to the campaign of Democratic primary candidate Justin Lamar Sternad during the 2011-2012 election cycle. The allegations arose after campaign finance reports from Sternad failed to disclose the true source of the funds, which the FEC claimed were channeled through vendors at Rivera’s direction.
