ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project of California Renewal et al v. Bowen et al

Filing 16

MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project of California Renewal, National Organization for Marriage California - Yes on 8, Sponsored by National Organization for Marriage, John Doe #1. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Chandler, Timothy)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

James Bopp, Jr. (Ind. State Bar No. 2838-84)* Barry A. Bostrom (Ind. State Bar No.11912-84)* Sarah E. Troupis (Wis. State Bar No. 1061515)* Scott F. Bieniek (Ill. State Bar No. 6295901)* BOPP, COLESON & BOSTROM 1 South Sixth Street Terre Haute, IN 47807-3510 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Counsel for All Plaintiffs Timothy D. Chandler (Cal. State Bar No. 234325)** ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND 101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 100 Folsom, CA 95630 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Counsel for All Plaintiffs * Pro Hac Vice Application Pending ** Designated Counsel for Service United States District Court Eastern District of California Sacramento Division

ProtectMarriage.com, et al., v. Debra Bowen, et al., Defendants. Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:09-CV-00058-MCE-DAD [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

[Proposed] Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

This action is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The Court, having considered the memorandums in support and opposition, the Court being fully advised, and good cause shown: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED; Plaintiffs have demonstrated: (i) a likelihood of success on the merits on their claims, (ii) irreparable harm if they are not granted a preliminary injunction, (iii) the balance of hardships tipping in their favor, and (iv) the public interest favors the interim relief sought in their motion sufficient to merit and constitute good cause for the issuance of a Preliminary Injunction Order. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants, their agents, servants, employees, officials, or any other person acting in concert with them or on their behalf, are preliminarily enjoined immediately, and through the pendency of this action, from: (1) Enforcing California Government Code ("CGC") § 84200 ("Semi-Annual Report") against Plaintiffs ProtectMarriage.com, NOM-California, and members of the Class of Major Donors; (2) Commencing any criminal or civil actions against Plaintiffs ProtectMarriage.com, NOM-California, and members of the Class of Major Donors for failing to comply with CGC § 84200 or any other reporting provision of California's Political Reform Act of 1974, CGC § 81000 et seq.; and (3) Publishing or otherwise continuing to make available, whether directly or indirectly, any reports or campaign statements previously filed by Plaintiffs ProtectMarriage.com, NOM-California, and members of the Class of Major Donors as required by the Political Reform Act of 1974, CGC § 81000 et seq.

[Proposed] Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS ORDERED that no bond is required as no money is at stake in issuance of the injunction. The balance of hardships favors Plaintiffs, who are experiencing harm to fundamental rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the United States, while Defendants do not face a likelihood of financial or other harm from complying with this injunction. Jorgensen v. Cassiday, 320 F.3d 906, 919 (9th Cir. 2003); Vietnamese Buddhism Study Temple in Am. v. City of Garden Grove, 460 F. Supp. 2d 1165, 1177 (C.D. Cal. 2006).

SO ORDERED this ____ day of January, 2009.

______________________________ Hon. Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge

[Proposed] Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction

3