N.D. Tex. 7:16-cv-00054 Case History
State of Texas v. United States
No. 7:16-cv-00054, Docket
Court: Northern District Texas
Assigned to: Judge Reed C O’Connor
Associated Cases:
Texas v. United States, No. 16-11534, Docket (5th Cir.) (appeal dismissed, per Appellant motion 3/3/2017)
Voluntarily Dismissed March 03, 2017; Case closed 03/03/2017
COMPLAINTS
- Complaint (05/25/2016)
- Amended Complaint (06/15/2016)
- Answer due 30 days after ruling on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction [due Sept 20]
- [see, Motion for Extension (07/15/2016) (Granted)]
- Second Motion for Extension of Time to Answer (09/13/2016)
- Answer due 30 days after ruling on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction [due Sept 20]
- Plaintiffs’ Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (03/03/2017)
- Following DOJ and Dept. of Ed letter withdrawing prior policy and guidance, Plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice
- Preliminary Injunction is necessarily dissolved
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Granted; Subsequently Dissolved)
- Plaintiffs’ Application for Preliminary Injunction (07/06/2016)
- Plaintiffs’ Exhibit W in support of application w/ motion for permission to file (08/19/2016)
- Amicus Briefs in Support of Application
- Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund (07/15/2016)
- – Motion for leave to file; Memo in support (07/13/2016) (Granted)
- Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter (07/22/2016)
- – Motion for leave to file; Memo in support (07/17/2016) (Granted)
- Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund (07/15/2016)
- Defendants’ Opposition (07/27/2016)
- Amicus Briefs in Opposition to Application (07/27/2016)
- State of Washington, et al.
- Public Advocate for the City of New York
- – Motion for leave to file included with brief; Memo in support (Granted)
- ACLU, et al.
- – Motion for leave to file included with brief; Memo in support (Granted)
- Amicus Briefs in Opposition to Application (07/27/2016)
- Plaintiffs’ Reply (07/27/2016)
- HEARING on preliminary injunction held August 12, 2016; TRANSCRIPT (Corrected)
- ORDER Granting injunction (08/21/2016)
- All parties to this cause of action must maintain the status quo as of the date of issuance of this Order and this preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Court rules on the merits of this claim, or until further direction from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
- This preliminary injunction shall be binding on Defendants and any officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, or other persons in active concert or participation with Defendants.
- Defendants are enjoined from:
- enforcing the Guidelines against Plaintiffs and their respective schools, school boards, and other public, educationally-based institutions;
- initiating, continuing, or concluding any investigation based on Defendants’ interpretation that the definition of sex includes gender identity in Title IX’s prohibition against discrimination on the basis of sex;
- using the Guidelines or asserting the Guidelines carry weight in any litigation initiated following the date of this Order.
- Scope of the Injunction
- The Court concludes this injunction should apply nationwide.
- [ ] an injunction should not unnecessarily interfere with litigation currently pending before other federal courts on this subject regardless of the state law. As such, the parties should file a pleading describing those cases so the Court can appropriately narrow the scope if appropriate.
- See below for Notice of Appeal
Procedure as to Scope of Injunction
- Notices of Pending Litigation
- Defendants’ Notice (08/30/2016)
- Plaintiffs’ Notice (09/09/2016)
- Defendants Reply to Plaintiffs’ Notice (09/14/2016)
- Defendants’ Motion for Clarification of Injunction (09/12/2016)
- Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion (09/19/2016)
- Defendants’ Reply in support of motion (09/23/2016)
- Defendants’ Notice to the Court of other litigation (09/27/2016)
- USA must respond to motion for preliminary injunction in Privacy Matters v. U.S. Dept of Ed by October 11
- Reiterate request for ruling on motion for clarification by Oct 3
- Defendants’ Notice of Supplemental Authority (09/28/2016)
- Informing Court that on September 23, 5th Circuit vacated its panel decision in Texas v. EEOC, No. 14-10949, an opinion this court relied substantially on in granting the preliminary injunction
- Hearing held September 30, 2016; Minute Entry; TRANSCRIPT (Corrected)
- ORDER (10/18/2016)
- Clarifies that
- Preliminary injunction applies nationwide
- Defendants’ core missions to combat discrimination based on race, national origin, or disability, and the EEOC’s statutory duties are not otherwise affected by the preliminary injunction
- Injunction limited to issue of access to intimate facilities.
- Defendants enjoined from relying on Guidelines, “but may offer textual analyses of Title IX and Title VII in cases where the Government and its agencies are defendants or where the United States Supreme Court or any Circuit Court request that Defendants file amicus curiae briefing on this issue.”
- Additional briefing ordered on “whether the Defendants’ Guidelines are enjoined in total or whether the principal of severability applies to them, whether the injunction implicates Title VII in any manner (and specifically where school employees and staff may share intimate facilities with students), and whether OSHA or DOL activity is implicated by the injunction.” See Supplemental Briefing, below
- Clarifies that
————————————————
Defendants’ Notice of Appeal to 5th Circuit Court of Appeals (10/20/2016)
– Appeals order granting preliminary injunction (08/21/16) and order on scope of injunction (10/18/16)
Docketed as case number 16-11534
————————————————
Supplemental Briefing
- Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief (10/24/2016)
- Defendants’ Supplemental Brief (10/28/2016)
Motion for Partial Stay
- Defendants’ Motion for partial stay pending appeal of preliminary injunction (11/07/2016)
- Only as to the injunction’s application to states and entities that are not plaintiffs in this case.
- Order for response by November 15, 2016 (11/09/2016)
- Plaintiffs’ Opposition to stay (11/15/2016)
- ORDER – Stay Denied (11/20/2016)
MOTIONS TO INTERVENE
Dr. Rachel Tudor
- Dr. Rachel Tudor’s Motion to Intervene (09/12/2016)
- — Seeking intervention as a 3rd party plaintiff naming the State of Oklahoma as a 3rd party defendant
- — for the limited purpose of seeking a declaratory judgment recognizing that a July, 2015 order issued by Judge Cauthron of the W.D. Okla. finally decided the question of whether Dr. Tudor is a member of a protected class under Title VII.
- Responses (10/03/2016)
- Defendants, in opposition
- Plaintiffs, in opposition
- Replies in support of motion (10/17/2016)
- Reply to Defendants
- Reply to Plaintiffs (corrected filed 10/19/2016)
- Dr. Tudor’s Request for Ruling on Motion to Intervene (10/27/2016)
————————————————
Dr. Tudor’s Notice of Protective Appeal to 5th Circuit Court of Appeals (11/03/2016)
– Appeals order granting preliminary injunction (08/21/16) and order on scope of injunction (10/18/16)
Added as party to case docketed as number 16-11534
————————————————
Rhonda Fleming, et al
- Rhonda Fleming, et al., Motion to Intervene (12/29/2016) and Complaint (01/27/2017)
- For declarations in support of Motion, see docket numbers 103-111, 115, 119-122
- Parties’ Responses in Opposition to Motion
- Plaintiffs State of Texas, et al. (01/16/2017)
- Defendants (01/19/2017)
- Fleming, et al., Replies in Response to Oppositions
- Reply to Plaintiffs (01/25/2017)
- Reply to Defendants (01/27/2017)
- Fleming, et al., Motion for Preliminary Injunction (12/30/2016) and Addendum to Motion (01/17/2017)
- Plaintiffs State of Texas, et al, Response in Opposition (01/17/2017)
- Fleming, et al., Reply in support of motion (01/01/2017)
- ORDER (02/03/2017)
- Clerk to open new civil action entitled “Rhonda Fleming, et al. v. John Doe”
- Motions to Intervene and for Preliminary Injunction severed and removed to new civil action
- Motions denied as moot in present case
- Clerk’s Note: New civil case opened: 7:17-CV-0009
CASE MANAGEMENT PROCEEDINGS
- Order requiring parties’ scheduling conference and report (08/30/2016)
- Parties’ Joint Report on discovery matters (09/26/2016)
Current through Docket # 129+1, 03/03/2017