Perry et al v. Schwarzenegger et al

Filing 64

MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae Equality California filed by Equality California. Motion Hearing set for 7/2/2009 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (Brosnahan, James) (Filed on 6/26/2009)

Perry et al v. Schwarzenegger et al

Doc. 64

Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document64

Filed06/26/09 Page1 of 3

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 J. BROSNAHAN (CA SBN 34555) JBrosnahan@mo fo.com STUART C. PLUNKETT (CA SBN 187971) SPlunkett@mo fo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 415.268.7522 TOBIAS BARRINGTON WOLFF (Pro Hac Vice Applicat ion Pending) UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL OF LAW 3400 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 215.898.9606 Attorneys for Amicus Curiae EQUALITY CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

KRISTIN M. PERRY et al., Plaint iffs, v. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER et al., Defendants.

Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EQUALITY CALIFORNIA Date: Time: Place: July 2, 2009 10:00 a.m. Ctrm. 6, 17th Floor

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EQUALITY CALIFORNIA Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW sf-2704046
Dockets.Justia.com

Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document64

Filed06/26/09 Page2 of 3

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

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Equality California requests the Court's leave to file, as amicus curiae, a brief addressing Plaintiffs' likelihood of success on the merits of their equal protection claim. Equality California has conferred with counsel for all parties and Proposed Intervenor, and all counsel have consented to this motion. I. STANDARD

The Court has broad discretion to permit a non-party to participate in an action as amicus curiae. See, e.g., Gerritson v. de la Madrid Hurtado, 819 F.2d 1511, 1514 n.3 (9th Cir. 1987); Nat. Res. Def. Council v. Evans, 243 F. Supp. 2d 1046, 1047 (N.D. Cal. 2003) (amici "may file briefs and may possibly participate in oral argument" in district court actions). As this Court has noted, "[d]istrict courts frequently welcome amicus briefs from non-parties concerning legal issues that have potential ramifications beyond the parties directly invo lved or if the amicus has `unique information or perspective that can help the court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties are able to provide.'" Sonoma Falls Dev., LLC v. Nevada Gold & Casinos, Inc., 272 F. Supp. 2d 919, 925 (N.D. Cal. 2003) (quoting Cobell v. Norton, 246 F Supp 2d 59, 62 (D.D.C. 2003) (citation omitted); see also In re Nat'l Sec. Agency Tele. Records Litig., No. 061791 VRW, 2009 WL 1561818, at *9-10 (N.D. Cal. June 3, 2009) (relying on submissions of amici curiae regarding proper interpretation of statute). II. IDENTITY AND INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE

Equalit y California is a state-wide advocacy group protecting the needs and interests of same-sex couples and their children in California. It is also California's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender civil rights organization, with tens of thousands of members. Equalit y California's members include registered voters in every county in the State of California. The issues raised by Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction will directly affect Equality California's members and supporters. Equality California thus has a substantial interest in participating in these proceedings. Equalit y California has also developed extensive expertise regarding the legal and factual issues raised by Plaintiffs' motion. Equality California has participated in other judicial
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EQUALITY CALIFORNIA Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW sf-2704046

1

Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW Document64

Filed06/26/09 Page3 of 3

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

proceedings concerning marriage equality. For example, Equality California was a petitioner in Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 68 (Cal. 2009). Equality California also spearheaded the "No" on Proposition 8 campaign, and was one of the leading fund-raising organizations for the campaign. Geoffrey Kors, the Executive Director of Equalit y California, was a co-chair of "No-On-8." As a result of its involvement in marriage equality advocacy, Equality California has developed significant expertise in the gay rights movement, the marriage equality movement, the legal issues surrounding same-sex marriage rights in the states and at the federal level, and state and federal constitutional issues specific to Proposition 8. For these reasons, the Court should grant Equality California leave to file the accompanying amicus curiae brief and to participate in the proceedings. Dated: June 26, 2009 JAMES J. BROSNAHAN STUART C. PLUNKETT MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP TOBIAS BARRINGTON WOLFF UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL OF LAW

By: /s/ James J. Brosnahan JAMES J. BROSNAHAN Attorneys for Amicus Curiae EQUALITY CALIFORNIA

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EQUALITY CALIFORNIA Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW sf-2704046

2