• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIOWESTERN DIVISIONTHOMAS E. BRINKMAN, JR., et al.,Plaintiffs,v.ARMOND D. BUDISH, Speaker of theOhio House of Representatives andChairman of the Joint Legislative EthicsCommittee of the Ohio GeneralAssembly, et al.,Defendants.:::::::::::::Case No. 1:09-CV-00326Judge DLOTTMagistrate Judge ______________PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATEMPORARY RESTRIAING ORDERAND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs hereby move for theissuance of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of section 102.03(A)(4) of the Ohio Revised Code (the “Statute”), which prohibits,
inter alia
, any formermember of the Ohio General Assembly from representing, or acting in any representative capacity, foror on behalf of any person on any matter pending before the General Assembly, any committee of theGeneral Assembly or the Ohio State Controlling Board, regardless of whether such former member isengaging in such activities for compensation or not, while still allowing such representative activities onbehalf of a state agency or political subdivision. Because the Statute impermissibly violates Plaintiffs’rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, including freedom of speech,freedom of association and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, as well deniesequal protection of the law, the unconstitutional Statute must be immediately enjoined less Plaintiffssuffer and continue to suffer irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law. Pursuant toLocal Rule 7.2(a)(1), this motion is accompanied by the following memorandum in support. As therequested temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction seek to protect and promote rights
Case 1:09-cv-00326-SJD Document 2 Filed 05/11/2009 Page 1 of 19
 
 2under the First Amendment, Plaintiffs request that the Court waive the requirement to give securitypursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(c).
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORTI. I
NTRODUCTION
 
Plaintiffs initiated this civil rights action today by filing a Verified Complaint challengingsection 102.03(A)(4) of the Ohio Revised Code (the “Statute”). The challenged Statute subjects coreFirst Amendment speech, petitioning and associational rights to burdensome and intrusive requirementsthat impermissibly infringe such rights of the Plaintiffs. Furthermore, the challenged Statute violates theEqual Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as, through its express terms, it has a direct,through disproportionate and unconstituional, impact upon the fundamental rights of Plaintiffs.
A.
 
Parties1. Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Thomas E. Brinkman, Jr., is a citizen and taxpayer of the State of Ohio and is a memberand supporter of Plaintiff Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending & Taxes (“COAST”). (VerifiedComplaint ¶1.) Furthermore, from January 2001 to December 2008, Plaintiff Brinkman was a memberof the Ohio House of Representatives, one of the two bodies comprising the Ohio General Assembly.(Verified Complaint ¶1.) Historically, Plaintiff Brinkman has acted in the role of official “Spokesman”for Plaintiff COAST, supplementing the Chairman of Plaintiff COAST in speaking to the news mediaand civic organizations on issues of public importance. (Verified Complaint ¶25.)Plaintiff Mark Miller is a citizen and taxpayer of the State of Ohio and is a member, supporterand duly authorized agent of COAST. (Verified Complaint ¶4.) Specifically, Plaintiff Miller serves asthe treasurer of COAST. (Verified Complaint ¶4.) Furthermore, through Plaintiff Coalition Opposed toAdditional Spending & Taxes, Plaintiff Miller is able to join and associate with other individuals in
Case 1:09-cv-00326-SJD Document 2 Filed 05/11/2009 Page 2 of 19
 
 3order to collectively advocate and promote the political issues which Miller and such other individualssupport. (Verified Complaint ¶4.)Founded in 1999 (by,
inter alios
, Plaintiff Brinkman, prior to his election to the Ohio House of Representatives), Plaintiff Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending & Taxes (“COAST”) is anunincorporated association of individuals organized as a political action committee under the laws of theState of Ohio. (Verified Complaint ¶¶5 & 23.) Over the years, Plaintiff COAST has advocated on taxand spending issues before the Ohio legislature, the Hamilton County Board of County Commissioners,the Cincinnati City Council and many other administrative and legislative bodies. (Verified Complaint ¶24.) Plaintiff COAST is also active in advocating for the election or defeat of candidates on the balloteach year, and on ballot issues throughout the State of Ohio. (Verified Complaint ¶24.) Plaintiff COAST conducts its advocacy activities in a variety of ways, including without limitation sending an e-mailed newsletter that is distributed to approximately 10,000 persons monthly, operating a web site(www.gocoast.org
 
) and blog (www.coast-usa.blogspot.com
 
), sending direct mailings on issues of importance and for fundraising purposes, sending press releases, holding press conferences, hostingrallies, direct lobbying of various legislative bodies on issues of importance, as well as other events.(Verified Complaint ¶26.) Plaintiff COAST also encourages its members and supporters to contact theirlegislators on matters of importance, including pending legislation. (Verified Complaint ¶27.) This isdone through e-mailed Action Alerts to Plaintiff COAST’s e-mail distribution lists, physical mailings,“virtual town hall meetings” and in-person contacts.
1
(Verified Complaint ¶27.) Plaintiff COAST, onbehalf of its members, has also directly lobbied legislators through Plaintiff COAST’s leadership and bytestimony before legislative bodies. (Verified Complaint ¶28.) Plaintiff COAST intends to continuethis advocacy for many years into the future. (Verified Complaint ¶24.)
1
“Virtual town hall meetings” are conference calls among thousands of voters initiated by nearly-simultaneousautomated calls out to thousands of households. (Verified Complaint ¶27.)
Case 1:09-cv-00326-SJD Document 2 Filed 05/11/2009 Page 3 of 19
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...