State of California et al v. Trump et al

Filing 57

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION To enlarge page limits in support of motion for injunctive relief filed by State of California. Responses due by 4/18/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Declaration of Lee Sherman, # 3 Notice of Motion & Motion for Preliminary Injunction, # 4 Proposed Order, # 5 Appendix of Declarations re: TFF, # 6 Appendix of Declarations re: Environmental, # 7 Request for Judicial Notice, # 8 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Sherman, Lee) (Filed on 4/4/2019)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
ROBERT W. BYRNE
SALLY MAGNANI
MICHAEL L. NEWMAN
Senior Assistant Attorneys General
MICHAEL P. CAYABAN
CHRISTINE CHUANG
EDWARD H. OCHOA
Supervising Deputy Attorneys General
HEATHER C. LESLIE
JANELLE M. SMITH
JAMES F. ZAHRADKA II
LEE I. SHERMAN (SBN 272271)
Deputy Attorneys General
300 S. Spring St., Suite 1702
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff State of California

12
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
OAKLAND DIVISION
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

STATE OF CALIFORNIA; STATE OF
COLORADO; STATE OF
CONNECTICUT; STATE OF
DELAWARE; STATE OF HAWAII;
STATE OF ILLINOIS; STATE OF
MAINE; STATE OF MARYLAND;
COMMONWEALTH OF
MASSACHUSETTS; ATTORNEY
GENERAL DANA NESSEL ON BEHALF
OF THE PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN;
STATE OF MINNESOTA; STATE OF
NEVADA; STATE OF NEW JERSEY;
STATE OF NEW MEXICO; STATE OF
NEW YORK; STATE OF OREGON;
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND; STATE OF
VERMONT; COMMONWEALTH OF
VIRGINIA; and STATE OF WISCONSIN;

DECLARATION OF LEE I. SHERMAN
IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
EXCEED APPLICABLE PAGE LIMITS
FOR PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Plaintiffs,

26
27

Case No. 4:19-cv-00872-HSG

v.

28
Decl. of Lee I. Sherman in Supp. of Admin. Mot. to Exceed Applicable Page Limits (4:19-cv-00872-HSG)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity
as President of the United States of America;
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; PATRICK
M. SHANAHAN, in his official capacity as
Acting Secretary of Defense; MARK T.
ESPER, in his official capacity as Secretary of
the Army; RICHARD V. SPENCER, in his
official capacity as Secretary of the Navy;
HEATHER WILSON, in her official capacity
as Secretary of the Air Force; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY;
STEVEN T. MNUCHIN, in his official
capacity as Secretary of the Treasury; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR;
DAVID BERNHARDT, in his official capacity
as Acting Secretary of the Interior; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY; KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN, in
her official capacity as Secretary of Homeland
Security;
Defendants.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Decl. of Lee I. Sherman in Supp. of Admin. Mot. to Exceed Applicable Page Limits (4:19-cv-00872-HSG)

1

I, Lee I. Sherman, declare as follows:

2

1.

3
4
5
6

I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration. If called as a

witness, I could and would testify competently to the matters set forth below.
2.

I am a Deputy Attorney General with the California Department of Justice, and am

counsel of record for Plaintiff the State of California in this matter.
3.

On April 4, 2019, I filed an Administrative Motion to Exceed Applicable Page

7

Limits for Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Attached to that Administrative Motion

8

is a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PI Motion) filed by Plaintiff States seeking to prevent

9

Defendants from diverting federal funds and resources toward the construction of a border wall

10
11

for the pendency of this litigation.
4.

In the PI Motion, Plaintiff States are asserting a likelihood of success on numerous

12

statutory and constitutional claims to contest Defendants’ unlawful redirection of funds and

13

resources appropriated for other purposes towards construction of a border wall, and to challenge

14

Defendants’ plan to proceed with border wall construction without complying with the National

15

Environmental Policy Act. Plaintiff States request additional pages so they can provide necessary

16

details regarding Defendants’ actions and sufficient analysis of the underlying statutes and

17

constitutional principles relevant to Plaintiff States’ claims.

18

5.

Plaintiff States also request additional pages for their PI Motion to outline the

19

evidence of irreparable harm that supports the PI Motion. There are twenty states moving for

20

relief and while Plaintiff States have endeavored to be concise in their briefing, additional pages

21

are required given the variety of claims raised and number of Plaintiff States involved in the PI

22

Motion.

23

6.

Plaintiff States were not able to meet and confer with Defendants concerning this

24

request for additional pages because counsel for Defendants have not yet appeared in this

25

litigation or submitted notices of appearance. Therefore, Plaintiff States were not able to obtain a

26

stipulation from Defendants concerning the relief sought in this Motion.

27
28

7.

If this Administrative Motion is granted, Plaintiff States would not oppose a

request from Defendants (collectively) seeking leave to file excess pages in response to Plaintiffs’
1
Decl. of Lee I. Sherman in Supp. of Admin. Mot. to Exceed Applicable Page Limit (4:19-cv-00872-HSG)

1

2
3
4

PI Motion, where Defendants ' response would also be limited to 35 pages total.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed on April 4, 20 19, at Los Angeles, California.

5
6

Lee I. She1man
Deputy Attorney General

7
8

9
10

11
12

13
14

15

16
17
18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27

28
2
Deel. of Lee I. Shennan in Supp. of Admin. Mot. to Exceed Applicable Page Limit ( 4: 19-cv-00872-HSG)