THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA v. SESSIONS
ORDER THAT UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION FILED BY PLAINTIFF CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT PHILADELPHIA'S MOTION IS GRANTED. IT IS ORDERED THAT DEFENDANT AND HIS ASSISTANTS, DEPUTIES, AGENTS, DESIGN EES, AND SUBORDINATES, AS WELL AS ANY PERSON ACTING IN CONCERT OR PARTICIPATION WITH THEM, ARE ENJOINED FROM REJECTING PHILADELPHIA'S FY 2017 APPLICATION FOR BYRNE JAG FUNDING OR WITHHOLDING ANY FY 2017 BYRNE JAG FUNDING FROM PHILADELPHIA BASED ON PHILADELPHIA'S CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH 8 U.S.C. 1373, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MICHAEL M. BAYLSON ON 11/15/17. 11/15/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(ti, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA
JEFFERSON BEAUREGARD SESSIONS
III, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
ORDER RE: PENDING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
AND NOW, this 15th
day of November, 2017, upon consideration of the Motion for
Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff City of Philadelphia (the “City” or “Philadelphia”),
Defendant’s opposition thereto, and the arguments of counsel, it is hereby ORDERED that
Philadelphia’s Motion is GRANTED.
It is ORDERED that Defendant and his assistants, deputies, agents, designees, and
subordinates, as well as any person acting in concert or participation with them, are enjoined from
rejecting Philadelphia’s FY 2017 application for Byrne JAG funding or withholding any FY 2017
Byrne JAG funding from Philadelphia based on Philadelphia’s certification of compliance with 8
U.S.C. § 1373. The City has demonstrated a likelihood of success on its claim that it substantially
complies with Section 1373 as lawfully and constitutionally construed.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Michael M. Baylson
MICHAEL M. BAYLSON, U.S.D.J.
O:\CIVIL 17\17-3894 City v Sessions\17cv3894 Order Granting Pl's Mot for Prelim Inj.docx
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?