State of Hawaii v. Trump
Filing
247
MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Philadephia, and Other Major Cities and Counties as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Convert the Temporary Restraining Order to a Preliminary Injunction (Dkt 238) Robert M. Kohn appearing for Amicus City and County of Honolulu (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Proposed Amici Curiae Brief, # 2 Appendix, # 3 Certificate of Service)(Kohn, Robert)
EDWARD N. SISKEL
Corporation Counsel
of the City of Chicago
BENNA RUTH SOLOMON*
Deputy Corporation Counsel
30 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 800
Chicago, IL 60602
(312) 744-7764
benna.solomon@cityofchicago.org
*Pending Pro Hac Vice Motion
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae,
City of Chicago
DONNA Y. L. LEONG, 3226
Corporation Counsel
ROBERT M. KOHN, 6291
NICOLETTE WINTER, 9588
Deputies Corporation Counsel
530 S. King St., Room 110
Honolulu, HI 96813
(808) 768-5100
robert.kohn@honolulu.gov
nwinter@honolulu.gov
Attorneys for City and County
of Honolulu
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI‘I
STATE OF HAWAI‘I, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DONALD J. TRUMP, et al.,
Defendants.
Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-00050DKW-KSC
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF
OF CHICAGO, LOS ANGELES, NEW
YORK, PHILADELPHIA, AND OTHER
MAJOR CITIES AND COUNTIES AS
AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO CONVERT
THE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER TO A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION (Dkt. 238)
Hearing March 29, 2017, 9:30 a.m.
Honorable Derrick K. Watson
RYAN P. POSCABLO
BRIAN NEFF
ELIBERTY LOPEZ
Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP
1330 Avenue of the Americas
6th Floor
(212) 660-1030
rposcablo@rshc-law.com
New York, NY 10019
NICK KAHLON
Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP
Three First National Plaza
70 W. Madison Street, Suite 2900
Chicago, IL 60602
(312) 471-8700
nkahlon@rshc-law.com
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae
City of Chicago
Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, and other major U.S. cities
and counties respectfully submit this motion for leave to file a brief amicus curiae in
support of Plaintiffs’ motion to convert the temporary restraining order to a
preliminary injunction.
1.
Amici include the largest cities and counties in the United
States. Along with other cities across the country, our physical and economic
security is damaged by Executive Order 13780, issued on March 6, 2017, and
entitled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United
States,” as we describe in our brief.
2.
The proposed amicus brief explains how the Order’s discrimination on
the basis of religion and national origin will significantly undermine the safety,
economic well-being, and social cohesion in our communities and across the United
States.
3.
Plaintiffs have consented to this motion. Defendants take no position
on our request to file an amicus brief.
WHEREFORE, amici respectfully request that this Court grant them leave to
file the amicus brief attached hereto.
Dated: March 23, 2017
Respectfully submitted,
s/Benna Ruth Solomon
s/Robert M. Kohn
EDWARD N. SISKEL
Corporation Counsel
of the City of Chicago
BENNA RUTH SOLOMON*
Deputy Corporation Counsel
30 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 800
Chicago, IL 60602 (312) 744-7764
benna.solomon@cityofchicago.org
*Pending Pro Hac Vice Motion
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae,
City of Chicago
RYAN P. POSCABLO
BRIAN NEFF
ELIBERTY LOPEZ
Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10019
(212) 660-1030
rposcablo@rshc-law.com
NICK KAHLON
Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP
Three First National Plaza
70 W. Madison Street, Suite 2900
Chicago, IL 60602
(312) 471-8700
nkahlon@rshc-law.com
DONNA Y. L. LEONG, 3226
Corporation Counsel
ROBERT M. KOHN, 6291
NICOLETTE WINTER, 9588
Deputies Corporation Counsel
530 S. King St., Room 110
Honolulu, HI 96813 (808) 7685100
robert.kohn@honolulu.gov
nwinter@honolulu.gov
Attorneys for City and County
of Honolulu
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae,
City of Chicago
2
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?