Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Perry: Amicus Brief of Walter Dellinger

Perry: Amicus Brief of Walter Dellinger

Ratings: (0)|Views: 20 |Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Hollingsworth v. Perry: Amicus brief of Walter Dellinger in support of Plaintiffs on the issue of standing
Hollingsworth v. Perry: Amicus brief of Walter Dellinger in support of Plaintiffs on the issue of standing

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: Equality Case Files on Mar 01, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/04/2013

pdf

text

original

 
No. 12-144
I
N
T
HE
 
Supreme Court of the United States
 ____________________ D
ENNIS
H
OLLINGSWORTH
,
ET AL
.,
 Petitioners
,v.
RISTEN
M.
 
P
ERRY 
,
ET AL
.,
Respondents
. ____________________ 
On Writ of Certiorari to theUnited States Court of Appealsfor the Ninth Circuit
 ____________________ 
BRIEF FOR WALTER DELLINGER AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORTOF RESPONDENTS ON THEISSUE OF STANDING
 ____________________ J
ONATHAN
D.
 
H
 ACKER
 O’M
ELVENY 
&
 
M
 YERS
LLP1625 Eye Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20006(202) 383-5300 A 
NTON
M
ETLITSKY 
 O’M
ELVENY 
&
 
M
 YERS
LLP7 Times SquareNew York, N.Y. 10036(212) 326-2000I
RVING
L.
 
G
ORNSTEIN
 (
Counsel of Record
)ilg@law.georgetown.eduG
EORGETOWN
U
NIVERSITY 
L
 AW
C
ENTER
 600 New Jersey Ave., N.W.Washington, D.C. 20001(202) 662-9934
  Attorneys for Amicus Curiae
 
i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
Page
 INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE .......................... 1INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF AR-GUMENT .................................................................. 1 ARGUMENT ............................................................. 8I. THE PROPONENTS’ GENERALIZEDINTEREST IN ENFORCEMENT OFPROPOSITION 8 IS NOT SUFFICIENTTO GIVE THEM ARTICLE III STAND-ING ..................................................................... 8II. A STATE CANNOT CONFER STAND-ING BY DENOMINATING A PRIVATEPARTY’S GENERALIZED INTEREST ASTHE STATE’S INTEREST .............................. 14III. AGENTS OF THE STATE CAN REPRE-SENT THE STATE’S INTERESTS, BUTPROPONENTS ARE NOT AGENTS OFTHE STATE ..................................................... 19 A.
 Karcher
And
 Arizonans
RecognizeThat Agents Of The State May Repre-sent The State’s Interests ........................... 20B. The Proponents Are Not Agents Of California .................................................... 22C. Other Decisions Of This Court SupportThe Agency Rule ......................................... 24
 
ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
(continued)Page
 D. The Agency Rule Preserves A FederalCourt’s Proper Role, Promotes TheConstitution’s Concern For Govern-ment Accountability, And AmelioratesThe Administrability Concerns RaisedBy The Ninth Circuit’s Rule ....................... 28IV. THE STATE CAN ENSURE DEFENSEOF ITS INITIATIVES WITHOUT PUT-TING IT IN THE HANDS OF PRIVATEPARTIES WHO HAVE NOTHING MORETHAN A GENERALIZED INTEREST IN A LAW’S ENFORCEMENT ............................. 30 V. THE COURT OF APPEALS’ JUDGMENTSHOULD BE VACATED, BUT THE DIS-TRICT COURT’S JUDGMENT SHOULDBE ALLOWED TO STAND ............................. 32CONCLUSION ........................................................ 34

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->