UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA PHOENIX DIVISION. Plaintiffs, Defendants.

Similar documents
Case: 1:11-cv Document #: 36 Filed: 11/10/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:147

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

upreme aurt at tl)e f nite tateg

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 04/11/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1

Case 1:12-cv RLY-DML Document 1 Filed 11/01/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

3:18-cv SEM-TSH # 1 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 1:08-cv Document 1 Filed 10/07/2008 Page 1 of 8

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS. Introduction

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Case 2:07-cv SMM Document 59 Filed 04/30/08 Page 1 of 15

Case 1:14-cv RGS Document 1 Filed 09/22/14 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 5:12-cv KHV-JWL- Document 53 Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DANE COUNTY. ROBERT DALLAS NEWTON, JR. 135 W. Washington St. Brandon, WI 53919, PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

Case 6:18-cv FPG Document 1 Filed 04/17/18 Page 1 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION PLAINTIFF, CASE NO.

Case 3:13-cv Document 1 Filed 07/08/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

Case 1:08-cv SSB-TSB Document 1 Filed 06/06/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv DN Document 2 Filed 01/15/16 Page 1 of 30

Case: 1:12-cv SJD Doc #: 54 Filed: 02/21/13 Page: 1 of 9 PAGEID #: 652

Case: 2:13-cv MHW-TPK Doc #: 42 Filed: 12/23/13 Page: 1 of 19 PAGEID #: 781

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

Case 2:17-cv SPL Document 1 Filed 05/08/17 Page 1 of 16

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION. Plaintiff, ) v. ) Case No. Defendants.

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 07/28/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:08-cv Document 1 Filed 06/26/2008 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 1:17-cv TJK Document 22 Filed 12/06/17 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA --ELECTRONICALLY FILED--

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA WESTERN DIVISION

Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 95 Filed 08/01/11 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 2:18-cv JJT Document 1 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Defendant.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS SIXTH DIVISION

CONSENT MOTION FOR A STATUS HEARING. Plaintiffs respectfully request that a status hearing be set in the abovecaptioned

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

Case 1:12-cv JCH-RHS Document 1 Filed 12/06/12 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION FLORIDA SECRETARY OF STATE S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

Snell & Wilmer IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Leslie Feldman, et al.,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : VERIFIED COMPLAINT

Case 1:15-cv MEH Document 4 Filed 04/02/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN MARION SUPERIOR COURT 1 COMMERCIAL COURT DOCKET COUNTY OF MARION ) CAUSE NO. 49D PL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA * CIVIL ACTION * * NO. * IN RE SEARCH AND SEIZURE * JUDGE * * MAGISTRATE COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4:12-cv SLD-JAG # 8 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ROCK ISLAND DIVISION

Case3:13-cv NC Document1 Filed12/09/13 Page1 of 18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 3:18-cv CWR-FKB Document 9 Filed 07/25/18 Page 1 of 11

Case 5:11-cv Document 1 Filed 06/17/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/22/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA HELENA DIVISION. Plaintiff,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION. Plaintiff, ) ) Defendant. ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS

Case: 2:18-cv ALM-EPD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/06/18 Page: 1 of 8 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv SS Document 1 Filed 12/20/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 1:13-cv FDS Document 14 Filed 03/06/13 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case3:13-cv WHA Document25 Filed02/26/14 Page1 of 21

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 01/15/18 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:1

Case: 1:12-cv SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/15/12 Page: 1 of 18 PAGEID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC ( Plaintiff ) complains and alleges as follows against Defendant Gimme Gimme, LLC ( Defendant ).

In The United States District Court For The Southern District of Ohio Eastern Division. Answer

Case 1:18-cv PGG Document 1 Filed 10/24/18 Page 1 of 6

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 65 Filed: 05/10/13 Page 1 of 20 PageID #:2093

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION JUDGE:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE DIVISION

Case 4:15-cv RLY-DML Document 1 Filed 07/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

CIV97-476PHXR0S. United States Attorney II I III II District of Arizona MR STATE OF ARIZONA; J. FIFE

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 08/24/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 6:13-cv JA-DAB Document 21 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID 330

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

Case 4:15-cv MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:18-cv RDB Document 1 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE DIVISION

Case 2:17-cv EJF Document 2 Filed 10/02/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Transcription:

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of 0 Thomas H. Geoghegan (pro hac vice) tgeoghegan@dsgchicago.com Michael P. Persoon (pro hac vice) mpersoon@dsgchicago.com Michael A. Schorsch (pro hac vice) mschorsch@dsgchicago.com Despres, Schwartz & Geoghegan, Ltd. West Washington Street, Suite Chicago, Illinois 00 Tel. () - Fax. () - admin@dsgchicago.com Michael Kielsky MK@UdallShumway.com Udall Shumway North Alma School Rd, Suite 0 Mesa, Arizona 0 Tel. (0) -00 Bar No. 0 Attorneys for Plaintiffs. William Price Tedards, Jr.; Monica Wnuk; Barry Hess; Lawrence Lilien, and Ross Trumble; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA PHOENIX DIVISION Plaintiffs, No. 0 v. Doug Ducey, Governor of Arizona, in his official capacity, and Jon Kyl, Senator of Arizona, in his official capacity, Defendants. COMPLAINT

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of 0 0 Introduction. The plaintiff voters seek an order directing the defendant Governor to issue a writ of election as required by the Seventeenth Amendment to fill the current vacancy in Arizona's representation in the Senate. When a vacancy happens, the Seventeenth Amendment provides: "When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies, Provided, That the Legislature of any State may empower the executive thereto make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. (Emphasis supplied.). On August, 0, Senator John McCain's death created a vacancy in Arizona's representation in the Senate. Despite the express duty imposed by the Seventeenth Amendment, the defendant Governor has failed to issue a writ of election. Instead pursuant to A.R.S. -, he has appointed defendant Kyl or his successor to represent plaintiffs and other voters until the general election in November 00, long after the people of the State could have filled the vacancy in an orderly election.. Under the proviso to the second paragraph of the Seventeenth Amendment and under Article I, section of the Constitution (Elections Clause), the state legislature has no authority to mandate that a temporary appointee shall serve in lieu of or in preference to a Senator directly elected by the people, beyond any period necessary to hold an orderly election. The state legislature may not substitute its own choice or the

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of 0 0 Governor's choice for a choice made by the people of the State. Furthermore, under A.R.S. -, under other circumstances, it is well established that an orderly schedule for election of a Senator can ordinarily take place within six months.. Accordingly, plaintiffs seek an order directing the Governor immediately to issue a writ of election to fill the vacancy in the State's representation as soon as practicable or in any case not later than six months from the issuance of the writ. Parties. Plaintiffs William Price Tedards, Jr., Monica Wnuk, Barry Hess, and Lawrence Lilien are residents of Arizona.. Defendant Governor Ducey is the Governor of Arizona and is sued here in his official capacity.. Defendant Jon Kyl is currently serving in the United States Senate to fill the vacancy created by the death of Senator John McCain and is sued here as an indispensable party defendant and in his official capacity. Jurisdiction and Venue. Plaintiffs invoke the jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to U.S.C. and U.S.C., and under the federal question jurisdiction of this Court. Facts. Plaintiffs all are registered voters. 0. Plaintiff Tedards is registered as an Independent.. Plaintiff Wnuk is registered as a Democrat.. Plaintiff Hess is registered as a Libertarian.

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of 0 0. Plaintiff Lilien is registered as a Democrat.. Plaintiff Trumble is registered as a Republican.. In the general election of 0, John McCain was elected to a six-year term that expires on January, 0.. On August, 0 Senator McCain died after a long illness, and a vacancy arose in the state's representation in the Senate.. In the case of a vacancy, the Seventeenth Amendment provides as follows: "When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writes of election to fill such vacancies, Provided, That the Legislature of any State may empower the executive thereto make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.. On September, 0 pursuant to A.R.S. -, the defendant Governor appointed Jon Kyle and any successor to serve on a "temporary" basis in the United States Senate.. Under A.R.S. -, Kyl or any successor named by the defendant Governor shall serve until the general election to be held in November 00, over two years after his temporary appointment. 0. Under A.R.S. -, there is no provision for a special election to fill a Senate vacancy except at the next general election, however far off that may be.. Under A.R.S. -, and under other provisions of Arizona law, it is otherwise the case that an election for a United States Senator can take place within six months.

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of 0 0. Under A.R.S. -, if the vacancy arises within six months of the next general election, such election to fill the vacancy will be postponed until the next general election.. Since Senator McCain died on August, 0, and since his death occurred within six months of the election just held on November, 0, an election to fill the vacancy has been postponed for two years until the next general election in November 00.. As a result, plaintiff voters and other citizens of Arizona will be deprived of elected representation in the Senate for over twenty eight months, and will suffer irreparable injury from such a lengthy loss of elected representation in the United States Senate. COUNT I Section : Violation of the Seventeenth Amendment. By the acts set forth above, and in violation of U.S.C., and by failing to issue a writ of election setting a date to fill the vacancy created by the death of Senator John McCain, and by keeping in office a "temporary" appointee far beyond the period within which an orderly election could be held, the defendant Governor has deprived plaintiffs and other citizens of their right to vote under the Seventeenth Amendment and to determine who shall represent the people in the Senate.. As set forth above, the authority conferred on the state legislature by the proviso of the second paragraph of the Seventeenth Amendment confers on a state

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of 0 0 legislature no more authority than it has under U.S. Const. Article I, section (Elections Clause).. Under the Elections Clause, and equally under such proviso, the state legislature may issue only procedural regulations as to Time, Place and Manner, as necessary to facilitate the right of the people to fill the vacancy pursuant to a writ of election.. Under the Elections Clause, and equally under such proviso, the state legislature has no authority to interfere with the right of plaintiffs and other citizens to choose their own Senator, and no authority to prefer a Senator appointed by the Governor beyond the period that the people of the State could have filled the vacancy by an orderly election.. Accordingly, A.R.S. - is unconstitutional under the Seventeenth Amendment and the Elections Clause because it mandates that the Governor keep in office a temporary appointee beyond the period that the people could choose a replacement and for such reason is an unlawful interposition between the people and the National Government. COUNT II Section : Violation of Privileges and Immunities Clause 0. By the acts set forth above, and in violation of U.S.C., the defendant Governor has deprived the plaintiffs of their rights as federal citizens under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment COUNT III

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of Section : Violation of First Amendment. By the acts set forth above, and in violation of U.S.C., the defendant Governor has deprived the plaintiffs of their rights under the First Amendment. COUNT IV Section : Violation of Equal Protection Clause By the acts set forth above, and in violation of U.S.C., the defendant Governor has deprived the plaintiffs of their rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.. WHEREFORE plaintiffs pray this Court to 0 A. Order the defendant Governor immediately to issue a writ of election for an election by the people of the State to fill the vacancy created by the death of 0 Senator McCain; B. Order the defendant Governor to hold such election as soon as practicable and no later than six months from the date such writ is issued; C. Declare that A.R.S. - is unconstitutional in relevant part for the reasons set forth above in that A.R.S. - fails to allow for the Governor to issue a writ or otherwise perform his constitutional duty under the Seventeenth Amendment; D. Declare that A.R.S. - is unconstitutional under the Seventeenth Amendment and the Elections Clause for the reasons set forth above in that it requires a temporary appointee to serve in the Senate beyond the period that the people of Arizona could fill the vacancy by election;

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of 0 E. Declare that A.R.S. - for the reasons set forth above is an unlawful interposition between the people of the State and the National Government and that in enforcing A.R.S. - and in violation of U.S.C., the defendant Governor is depriving or will deprive the plaintiffs and other citizens of this State of their rights under the Seventeenth Amendment, the First Amendment, and the Privileges and Immunities Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, in violation of U.S.C. ; F. Grant such other relief as may be necessary or appropriate to hold such an election in an orderly manner and pursuant to state law where not otherwise in conflict with plaintiffs' constitutional rights; G. Retain jurisdiction of this matter until an election to fill the vacancy is held and the outcome of such election is certified; H. Grant plaintiffs their legal fees and costs pursuant to U.S.C.. 0 Dated: November, 0 Michael Kielsky Udall Shumway North Alma School Rd, Suite 0 Mesa, Arizona 0 MK@UdallShumway.com (0) -00 Bar No. 0 Respectfully Submitted, By: /s/ Michael Kielsky One of Plaintiffs Attorneys

Case :-cv-0-djh Document Filed // Page of Thomas H. Geoghegan (pro hac vice) Despres, Schwartz & Geoghegan, Ltd. West Washington Street, Suite Chicago, Illinois 00 admin@dsgchicago.com () - 0 0