Jordahl v. Brnovich, CV-17-08263-PCT-DJH. (2020)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20200129887
Visitors: 16
Filed: Jan. 28, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 28, 2020
Summary: ORDER DIANE J. HUMETEWA , District Judge . This case is on remand from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 27, 2018, this Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and enjoined Defendants from enforcing A.R.S. 35-393.01(A) ("the Act"), an Arizona statute that prohibited public entities from contracting with companies that engage in "boycott[s] of Israel." (Doc. 63). Defendants appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Doc. 65). While th
Summary: ORDER DIANE J. HUMETEWA , District Judge . This case is on remand from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 27, 2018, this Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and enjoined Defendants from enforcing A.R.S. 35-393.01(A) ("the Act"), an Arizona statute that prohibited public entities from contracting with companies that engage in "boycott[s] of Israel." (Doc. 63). Defendants appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Doc. 65). While tha..
More
ORDER
DIANE J. HUMETEWA, District Judge.
This case is on remand from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 27, 2018, this Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and enjoined Defendants from enforcing A.R.S. § 35-393.01(A) ("the Act"), an Arizona statute that prohibited public entities from contracting with companies that engage in "boycott[s] of Israel." (Doc. 63). Defendants appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Doc. 65). While that appeal was pending, the Arizona Legislature amended portions of the Act with Senate Bill 1167 ("the revised Act"). The revised Act took effect in August 2019 and effectively exempts Plaintiffs from its terms.1 Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit found that Plaintiffs' claims for declaratory and injunctive relief were moot. (Doc. 85-1). In its Memorandum Decision, the Ninth Circuit vacated the preliminary injunction and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss Plaintiffs' claims for declaratory and injunctive relief.2 (Id.) In accordance with the Ninth Circuit's instructions,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs' claims for declaratory and injunctive relief are moot and therefore are DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this case and enter judgment accordingly.
FootNotes
1. The revised Act now only applies to (1) companies with ten or more full-time employees, and (2) contracts valued at $100,000 or more. See S.B. 1167, 54th Leg., 1st Reg. Sess (Ariz. 2019); Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 35-393(2), 35-393.01(A).
2. As the Ninth Circuit noted, this Court will retain jurisdiction to determine whether an award of attorneys' fees is appropriate under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b). Watson v. Cty of Riverside, 300 F.3d 1092, 1094-95 (9th Cir. 2002).
Source: Leagle
