JAMES S. GWIN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Citizens for Trump, Organize Ohio, and Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless bring First Amendment and due process challenges to Defendant City of Cleveland's 2016 Republican National Convention regulations.
Defendants Cleveland and Mayor Frank Jackson move to compel the joinder of the Republican National Convention Committee on Arrangements ("COA") and the Host Committee.
Beginning July 18, 2016, Cleveland will host the Republican National Convention. On May 25, 2016, Defendant Cleveland promulgated regulations for the convention.
The regulations designate a 3.3 square miles "Event Zone" around the Quicken Loans arena. Major convention business and voting will take place at the Quicken Loan arena.
The regulations also designate a "Parade Route" along the Carnegie-Lorain bridge, ending several hundred feet from the Quicken Loans arena.
On June 14, 2016, Plaintiffs brought First Amendment and due process challenges to the Event Zone restrictions, Parade Route, and parade permit processing.
On June 16, 2016, Defendants moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 to compel the joinder of COA and the Host Committee.
On June 20, 2016, COA moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 to intervene in this case.
Under Rule 19, a party must be joined to a case if "the court cannot accord complete relief among the existing parties" without the missing party, if proceeding with the case will impair the missing party's ability to protect its interests, or if proceeding would create a risk of multiple or inconsistent obligations.
Under Rule 24, a party may intervene in a case if permitted by statute, if not participating would impair the party's interests, if the party has a common claim or defense, or if the party is a government agency charged with administering a challenged regulation.
Neither COA nor the Host Committee is a necessary party to this litigation. Plaintiffs challenge Cleveland's regulations and parade permit processing. Plaintiffs make no claim against the COA or the Host Committee. While COA and the Host Committee may have given input regarding the challenged regulations, neither COA nor the Host Committee promulgated the regulations.
Furthermore, COA and the Host Committee are not state agencies and therefore do not risk violating Plaintiffs' constitutional rights.
This Court
For similar reasons, COA's motion to intervene loses. COA does not point to a statute authorizing a right to intervene. Under Deshaney, COA does not have a protectable interest in a specific level of security in the Event Zone.
COA does not seem to have any claim against Plaintiffs or vice versa. As explained above, COA is not a state entity capable of violating Plaintiffs' constitutional rights. Finally, as explained above, COA does not administer the challenged regulations or process permits; Cleveland does.
This Court
For the reasons above, this Court
IT IS SO ORDERED.