Victor Jordan alleged retaliation and constitutional violations over 2017 campaign dispute
BROOKLYN, NY – A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Victor Jordan, a former New York City Council candidate, who accused the New York City Campaign Finance Board (CFB) and several of its employees of violating his constitutional rights and retaliating against him during and after his 2017 campaign.
Key Points
- Judge Ann M. Donnelly dismissed Jordan’s federal claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988.
- The court found no plausible constitutional violations by the Campaign Finance Board or its staff.
- State law claims were dismissed without prejudice after the federal claims were resolved.
Dispute over campaign materials and fines
Jordan, who ran for City Council in the September 2017 Democratic primary, enrolled in the city’s matching funds program, which provides public financing to qualifying candidates. In his complaint, he claimed that CFB attorney Mark P. Griffin mishandled edits to his campaign’s Voter Guide Profile, leading to a dispute that allegedly caused his account to be “sabotaged” and forced him to withdraw from the matching funds program.
He further alleged that CFB attorney Cameron Ferrante “harassed and intimidated” him by phone and that the CFB later fined him for violations of the New York City Campaign Finance Act, a move he described as retaliation. Jordan asserted that the CFB’s enforcement actions continued through 2022, when the agency filed a civil lawsuit to collect unpaid fines.
The lawsuit named the CFB, its members and staff, including Frederick P. Schafer and Ferrante, as well as Cheryl LaRose, the treasurer of Jordan’s campaign committee.
Federal claims dismissed, state claims dropped
Judge Donnelly found that Jordan’s federal claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988, which alleged violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, failed to state a claim under federal law. The court also dismissed his conspiracy and due process allegations as conclusory and unsupported by specific facts.
“The Court grants the motion as to the federal claims,” Donnelly wrote, noting that Jordan did not file an opposition to the defendants’ motion to dismiss despite being granted multiple extensions.
Because the federal claims were dismissed, the court declined to exercise jurisdiction over Jordan’s state law claim for abuse of process, effectively closing the case.
Prior election disputes
Jordan, who has previously filed lawsuits involving public employment and political disputes, represented himself in the case. The court noted that as a non-lawyer, he could not legally represent the Committee to Elect Jordan, which was also listed as a plaintiff.
The case, Jordan v. NYC Campaign Finance Board et al., 24-CV-7266 (AMD) (CLP), was heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
Tags: Brooklyn, elections, campaign-finance
