PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-2205

JUSTICE 360,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

BRYAN P. STIRLING, Director of the South Carolina Department of Corrections; ALAN WILSON, South Carolina Attorney General,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:20-cv-03671-MGL)

Argued: May 3, 2022 Decided: August 3, 2022

Before AGEE, RICHARDSON, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded with instructions by published opinion. Judge Agee wrote the opinion, in which Judge Richardson and Judge Quattlebaum have joined.

ARGUED: Lindsey Caroline Ruff, BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP, New York, New York, for Appellant. Kevin Alan Hall, WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) LLP, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Jared K. Carter, First Amendment Clinic, CORNELL LAW SCHOOL, Ithaca, New York; John D. Kassel, KASSEL MCVEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Alan Wilson, Attorney General, Robert D. Cook, Solicitor General, J. Emory Smith, Jr., Deputy Solicitor General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina; USCA4 Appeal: 21-2205 Doc: 47 Filed: 08/03/2022 Pg: 2 of 19

M. Todd Carrell, Bryant S. Caldwell, WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) LLP, for Appellees.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 21-2205 Doc: 47 Filed: 08/03/2022 Pg: 3 of 19

AGEE, Circuit Judge:

Justice 360 offers post-conviction representation to South Carolina’s death-row

inmates. In the case before us, it brings no claims on behalf of those clients, and none of

them is a party. Instead, Justice 360 acts solely on its own behalf. The organization’s

Amended Complaint alleges that South Carolina Code § 24-3-580 (“Identity Statute”)—

which protects against the disclosure of certain information related to the State’s execution

protocols—violates its First Amendment right to counsel clients and to participate in public

debate about the death penalty. The district court rejected those assertions, and Justice 360

timely appealed, challenging only the dismissal of its claims against South Carolina

Department of Corrections (“SCDC” or the “Department”) Director Bryan Stirling. 1

Because Justice 360 lacks standing, however, we vacate the district court’s judgment and

remand with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

I.

Justice 360 suggests that its purpose is to “provide advice and support to individual

attorneys who are representing clients in federal capital habeas corpus proceedings.” J.A.

48 (citation omitted). It also represents that it endeavors to promote fairness and

transparency in the administration of South Carolina’s death penalty by lobbying for

1 The organization does not challenge the district court’s dismissal of its claims against South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson.

3 USCA4 Appeal: 21-2205 Doc: 47 Filed: 08/03/2022 Pg: 4 of 19

changes to existing law, taking part in public education initiatives, and engaging in

litigation.

In carrying out the organization’s mission, Justice 360’s attorneys represent about

40% of South Carolina’s death-row inmates. In that capacity, its attorneys