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
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
2:09-cv-02402-JWS #31

2:09-cv-02402-JWS #31

Ratings: (0)|Views: 6|Likes:
Published by Equality Case Files
Doc #31
Doc #31

More info:

Published by: Equality Case Files on Sep 10, 2011
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

06/28/2014

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
-1-
Jennifer C. Pizer (
 Pro Hac Vice
)Tara L. Borelli (
 Pro Hac Vice
)Desmund Wu (
 Pro Hac Vice
application pending)LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE ANDEDUCATION FUND, INC.3325 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1300Los Angeles, California 90010 jpizer@lambdalegal.orgtborelli@lambdalegal.orgdwu@lambdalegal.orgTelephone: 213.382.7600Daniel C. Barr (#010149)Rhonda L. Barnes (#023086)PERKINS COIE BROWN & BAIN P.A.2901 North Central Avenue, Suite 2000Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2788DBarr@perkinscoie.comRBarnes@perkinscoie.comTelephone: 602.351.8000Attorneys for Plaintiffs Tracy Collins, Keith B.Humphrey, Joseph R. Diaz, Beverly Seckinger, StephenRussell, Deanna Pfleger, Corey Seemiller, CarrieSperling and Leslie KempUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF ARIZONATracy Collins, et al.,Plaintiffs,v.Janice K. Brewer, in her official capacity asGovernor of the State of Arizona, et al.,Defendants. No. CV09-2402-PHX-JWS
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION ANDMEMORANDUM OF POINTSAND AUTHORITIES INSUPPORT OF PRELIMINARYINJUNCTION
Oral Argument Requested
Case 2:09-cv-02402-JWS Document 31 Filed 04/01/10 Page 1 of 23
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
-i-
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................... iTABLE OF AUTHORITIES.............................................................................................. iiINTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................2
STATEMENT OF FACTS.............................................................................................................4ARGUMENT..................................................................................................................................7
 
I.
 
PLAINTIFFS SATISFY THE STANDARDS FOR PRELIMINARYINJUNCTIVE RELIEF...........................................................................................7A.
 
Plaintiffs Are Likely To Prevail On Their Equal Protection And SubstantiveDue Process Claims............................................................................................81. Plaintiffs Will Prevail On Their Claim That Section O Deprives Them Of Equal Protection Based On Each One’s Sexual Orientation And Sex..........82. Plaintiffs Will Prevail On Their Claims That Section O ImpermissiblyInfringes The Liberty Interest Recognized In
 Lawrence v. Texas
..............123. Defendants Have Not Raised Any Legally Cognizable Defense ToPlaintiffs’ Claims.........................................................................................13B.
 
Plaintiffs Will Suffer Irreparable Injury If Section O Is Enforced To EliminateTheir Family Health Insurance.........................................................................14C.
 
The Extreme Hardship To Plaintiffs Of Foregoing Family Insurance, Or PayingSignificantly More For An Inferior Alternative, Greatly Outweighs The Negligible Cost To Defendants Of Maintaining The Status Quo.....................16D.
 
The Public Interest Favors Granting A Preliminary Injunction........................17CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................18CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE..........................................................................................19
Case 2:09-cv-02402-JWS Document 31 Filed 04/01/10 Page 2 of 23
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
-ii-
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESPageCASES
 Alaska Civil Liberties Union v. Alaska
 122 P.3d 781 (Alaska 2005)...........................................................................................8, 14
 Atlanta v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority
 636 F.2d 1084 (5th Cir. 1981)............................................................................................18
 Baehr v. Lewin
 852 P.2d 44 (Haw. 1993)....................................................................................................12
Cal. Pharmacists Ass’n v. Maxwell-Jolly
 563 F.3d 847 (9th Cir. 2009)........................................................................................15, 17
Cupolo v. Bay Area Rapid Transit 
 5 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (N.D. Cal. 1997)..................................................................................18
 Edelman v. Jordan
 415 U.S. 651 (1974)...........................................................................................................13
 Finstuen v. Crutcher 
 496 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2007)..........................................................................................10
 Friends of Earth, Inc. v. Brinegar 
 518 F.2d 322 (9th Cir. 1975)..............................................................................................18
 Frontiero v. Richardson
 411 U.S. 677 (1973).....................................................................................................11, 13
Graham v. Richardson
 403 U.S. 365 (1971)...........................................................................................................13
 Hernandez-Montiel v. INS 
 225 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2000)............................................................................................11
 High Tech Gays v. Def. Indus. Sec. Clearance Office
 895 F.2d 563 (9th Cir. 1990)................................................................................................9
 High Tech Gays v. Def. Indus. Sec. Clearance Office
 668 F. Supp. 1361 (N.D. Cal. 1987)...................................................................................10
 Hybritech Inc. v. Abbott Labs.
 849 F.2d 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1988)..........................................................................................17
 In re Golinski
587 F.3d 956 (9th Cir. 2009)..............................................................................................15
 In re Marriage Cases
 183 P.3d 384 (Cal. 2008)......................................................................................................8
Case 2:09-cv-02402-JWS Document 31 Filed 04/01/10 Page 3 of 23

You're Reading a Free Preview

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