• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
N
OS
.
 
09-17241,
 
09-____U
NITED
S
TATES
C
OURT OF
A
PPEALS
 F
OR
T
HE
N
INTH
C
IRCUIT
 
KRISTIN M. PERRY, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees
,v.DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, et al.
 Defendant-Intervenors-Appellees
.Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaCivil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)
 DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS-APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR STAY
Andrew P. PugnoL
AW
O
FFICES OF
A
NDREW
P.
 
P
UGNO
 101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 100Folsom, California 95630(916) 608-3065; (916) 608-3066 FaxBrian W. RaumJames A. CampbellA
LLIANCE
D
EFENSE
F
UND
 15100 North 90th StreetScottsdale, Arizona 85260(480) 444-0020; (480) 444-0028 FaxCharles J. Cooper
 
David H. Thompson
 
Howard C. Nielson, Jr.
 
Nicole J. MossJesse PanuccioPeter A. PattersonC
OOPER AND
K
IRK
,
 
PLLC1523 New Hampshire Ave., N.W.Washington, D.C. 20036(202) 220-9600; (202) 220-9601 Fax
 Attorneys for Defendant-Intervenors-Appellants
Case: 09-17241 11/13/2009 Page: 1 of 28 DktEntry: 7129821
 
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................2ARGUMENT.............................................................................................................7A.
 
J
URISDICTION
....................................................................................................7B. P
ROPONENTS
A
RE
L
IKELY
T
O
S
UCCEED ON THE
M
ERITS
..................................81. Disclosure Threatens Core First Amendment Rights.........................112. The Information At Issue Is Irrelevant................................................14C. I
RREPARABLE
H
ARM
I
S
C
ERTAIN IN THE
A
BSENCE OF A
S
TAY
...........................
17D. O
THER
P
ARTIES
W
ILL
N
OT
B
E
S
UBSTANTIALLY
I
NJURED BY A
S
TAY
............20E. T
HE
P
UBLIC
I
NTEREST
W
EIGHS IN
F
AVOR OF A
S
TAY
.....................................20CONCLUSION........................................................................................................20STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES...................................................................21- i -
Case: 09-17241 11/13/2009 Page: 2 of 28 DktEntry: 7129821
 
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCases
 
Page
 
 Adolph Coors Co. v. Wallace
, 570 F. Supp. 202 (N.D. Cal. 1983).....................9, 10
 Agster v. Maricopa County
, 422 F.3d 836 (9th Cir. 2005)......................................19
 Arthur v. Toledo
, 782 F.2d 565 (6th Cir. 1986).......................................................16
 Australia/E. USA Shipping Conference v. United States
, 537 F. Supp. 807(D.D.C. 1982).....................................................................................................10
 Bates v. City of Little Rock 
, 361 U.S. 516 (1960)......................................................8
 Bates v. Jones
, 131 F.3d 843 (9th Cir. 1997)...........................................................17
 Black Panther  Party v. Smith
, 661 F.2d 1243 (D.C. Cir. 1981),
vacated as moot,
458 U.S. 1118 (1982)...........................................................................................9
 Buckley v. American Const. Law Found.
, 525 U.S. 182 (1999)..............................12
California Pro-Life Council, Inc. v. Getman
, 328 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2003).........13
California Pro-Life Council, Inc. v. Randolph
, 507 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2007)......13
Canyon Ferry Rd. Baptist Church of E. Helena, Inc. v. Unsworth
,556 F.3d 1021 (9th Cir. 2009)............................................................................13
City of Los Angeles v. County of Kern
, 462 F. Supp. 2d 1105 (C.D. Cal. 2006),
vacated,
581 F.3d 841 (9th Cir. 2009)................................................................16
Crawford v. Board of Educ.
, 458 U.S. 527 (1982)..................................................16
 DeGregory v. Attorney Gen. of New Hampshire
, 383 U.S. 825 (1966)..............9, 10
 Dole v. Service Employees Union, AFL-CIO
, 950 F.2d 1456 (9th Cir. 1991)........10
 Elrod v. Burns
, 427 U.S. 347 (1976).......................................................................17
 Equality Found. of Greater Cincinnati v. Cincinnati
, 128 F.3d 289(6th Cir. 1997)....................................................................................................16
 ETSI Pipeline Project v. Burlington N., Inc.
, 674 F. Supp. 1489 (D.D.C. 1987)... 10
 Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Cent. Comm.
, 489 U.S. 214 (1989).......12
FEC v. Machinists Non-Partisan Political League
, 655 F.3d 380(D.C. Cir. 1981)............................................................................................10, 19
FCC v. Beach Commc’ns, Inc.
, 508 U.S. 307 (1993)..............................................14
First Nat’l Bank v. Bellotti
, 435 U.S. 765 (1978)................................................8, 12- ii -
Case: 09-17241 11/13/2009 Page: 3 of 28 DktEntry: 7129821
of 00

Leave a Comment

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