Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02128/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02128-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

American Federal of State, County and

Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local

3190,

Plaintiff,

v.

Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, et

al.,

Defendants. _________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-2128-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Based upon the parties' representation to the Court via Defendant’s Motion to Dissolve

Injunction as Moot (Doc. 58)and Plaintiff American Federation of State, County and Municipal

Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3190's Response thereto (Doc. 59), the Court acknowledge’s the

Defendants’ voluntarily replacement of the County Solicitation and Posting Policies [County

Policy A-1502 and County Policy A-1917] with new County Policy A-1512 purportedly

adopted on July 25, 2007.

Accordingly, to the extent the Court’s preliminary injunction enjoins enforcement of the

earlier policies which now have been replaced by the new policy, the Court cannot enjoin that

which no longer exists. Chemical Producers and Distributors Association v. Helliker, 463 F.3d

871 (9th Cir. 2006). Notwithstanding, Plaintiff contends that the preliminary injunction should

remain in force to enjoin Defendants from using the new County Policy A-1512 in any manner

that violates the First Amendment rights of Plaintiff or its members. The Court appreciates

Plaintiff’s concerns, however, the Court will not preemptively maintain an injunction. In other

words, Defendants are prohibited from using the policy in any manner that violates the First

Case 2:06-cv-02128-SMM Document 60 Filed 12/26/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 2 -

Amendment rights of Plaintiff or its members; however, unless and until such evidence exists

to support a finding of said violation of the new policy, the Court will not arbitrarily enter an

injunction.

Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED GRANTING Defendant’s Motion to Dissolve Injunction

as Moot (Doc. 58). 

DATED this 26th day of December, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-02128-SMM Document 60 Filed 12/26/07 Page 2 of 2