International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump

Filing 166

MOTION by Service Employees International Union Amicus Curiae leave to file Corrected Brief Amici Curiae of Service Employees International Union, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and American Federation of Teachers Supporting Plaintiffs-Appellees. Date and method of service: 04/19/2017 ecf. [1000065183] [17-1351] Claire Prestel

Download PDF
No. 17-1351 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT __________________________________________________ INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT, a project of the Urban Justice Center, Inc., on behalf of itself; HIAS, INC., on behalf of itself and its clients; MIDDLE EAST STUDIES ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., on behalf of itself and its members; MUHAMMED METEAB; PAUL HARRISON; IBRAHIM AHMED MOHOMED; JOHN DOES #1 & 3; JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs – Appellees, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States; DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT OF STATE; OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; JOHN F. KELLY, in his official capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security; REX W. TILLERSON, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; DANIEL R. COATS, in his official capacity as Director of National Intelligence, Defendants – Appellants. ___________________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, No. 8:17-cv-00361 (Chuang, J.) _________________________________________________ CORRECTED UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, AND AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS SUPPORTING PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES __________________________________________________ Nicole G. Berner Claire Prestel Deborah L. Smith Leo Gertner SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION 1800 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 730-7383 nicole.berner@seiu.org claire.prestel@seiu.org Steve W. Berman HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1918 Eighth Avenue, Ste. 3300 Seattle, Washington 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 steve@hbsslaw.com Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Service Employees International Union debbie.smith@seiu.org leo.gertner@seiu.org Judith Rivlin AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES 1625 L St., NW Washington, D.C. 20003 Attorney for American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees David J. Strom Channing M. Cooper AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS 555 New Jersey Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 393-7472 Attorneys for American Federation of Teachers I. INTRODUCTION The Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”), the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (“AFSCME”), and the American Federation of Teachers (“AFT”) respectfully move for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees. A copy of the proposed brief is attached and submitted herewith. Amici respectfully submit that the filing of this attached brief is timely, desirable, and worthy of this Court’s consideration. II. ARGUMENT The goal of any amicus curiae is “to call the court’s attention to … facts or circumstances in a matter then before it that may otherwise escape its consideration.”1 The fundamental requirements of Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure are that an amicus curiae brief be “relevant” and “desirable.”2 The proposed brief here satisfies both requirements. 1 4 Am. Jur. 2d, Amicus Curiae § 6 (2004). 2 Fed. R. App. P. 29(b)(1). -1- A. This Court Has Broad Discretion To Allow The Participation Of Amici Curiae Permitting a nonparty to submit a brief as amicus curiae is, “with immaterial exceptions, a matter of judicial grace.”3 Circuit courts have rarely disclosed the considerations weighed when deciding a motion for leave to file an amicus brief. But the courts in the Fourth Circuit have permitted briefs filed by amici who demonstrate “a special interest in the outcome of the suit” and “provide helpful information to the court.”4 And the Defendants-Appellants have indicated that they do not object to timely filed amicus briefs. B. SEIU, AFSCME and AFT Have the Requisite Interest SEIU, AFSCME, and AFT are international labor organizations representing millions of working men and women in the United States and Canada employed in the private and public sectors. Members include public school teachers, janitors, security officers, nurses, and long-term care workers who provide quality healthcare, education, and 3 NOW, Inc. v. Scheidler, 223 F.3d 615, 616 (7th Cir. 2000). Am. Humanist Ass’n v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Comm’n, 303 F.R.D. 266, 269 (D. Md. 2014). 4 -2- building services. All three amici have immigrant and foreign-born members directly affected by the challenged Executive Order. C. SEIU, AFSCME, and AFT Can Provide Helpful Information To The Court That Will Not Duplicate Arguments Presented By The Parties The accompanying amici brief from SEIU, AFSCME, and AFT provides additional information regarding the type of cognizable familyunity harm asserted by the plaintiffs in this case. Furthermore, the brief documents that the impact of the Executive Order on the union members and others across the nation is profound. These immediate, real-word impacts highlight the immediate and irreparable harm that will occur if the Executive Order is allowed to stand. D. The Amicus Brief is Timely The filing of this motion with the accompanying brief is timely. In this case, the Court has ordered that “any amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs shall be filed by April 19, 2017.” (Dkt. No. 25.) Accordingly, the instant motion and brief are being filed within the time frame set by the Order. Alternatively, and again drawing on the appellate rules, this Court can exercise its discretion, as it deems -3- necessary and appropriate, and specify a time within which the United States may “answer” the amicus brief from SEIU. See Fed. R. App. P. 29(e). III. CONCLUSION The Court should therefore exercise its discretion to permit SEIU, AFSCME, and AFT to file the attached amici brief. Counsel of record are familiar with the scope of the arguments presented by the parties and will not unduly repeat those arguments. Instead, amici draw from communications with union members and their families around the nation. These communications illustrate the profound, widespread, and irreparable harm the Executive Order has caused and would continue to cause if the District Court’s Preliminary Injunction were undone. DATED: April 19, 2017 By /s/ Claire Prestel Claire Prestel Nicole G. Berner Deborah L. Smith Leo Gertner SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION 1800 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 730-7383 Judith Rivlin AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES 1625 L St., NW Washington, D.C. 20003 Attorney for American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees -4- nicole.berner@seiu.org claire.prestel@seiu.org debbie.smith@seiu.org Steve W. Berman HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, Washington 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 steve@hbsslaw.com David J. Strom Channing M. Cooper AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS 555 New Jersey Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 393-7472 Attorneys for American Federation of Teachers Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Service Employees International Union -5- CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE This motion complies with the type-volume limits because it contains 618 words, excluding the parts exempted by Rule 32(f). This motion complies with the typeface and type-style requirements because it was prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Word in 14-point Century. April 19, 2017 /s/ Claire Prestel -6- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on April 19, 2017, this motion was served on all parties or their counsel of record through the CM/ECF system. April 19, 2017 /s/ Claire Prestel -7-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?