F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T WE N D Y T O WN L E Y ; A MY WHI T L OC K; AS HL E Y G UN S ON ; HE AT HE R T HO MAS ; DA X WOO D; CASJ A LI NFORD; W ES LE Y T OWNL E Y; J E NN Y R I E DL ; T OD D DO UG AN ; B R UC E WOOD B UR Y; J AME S W. DE GR AF F E NR E I D, P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l ees, v. R O S S M I L L E R , S e c r e t a ry of S t a t e of N evada, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t, a nd K I N G SLEY ED W A RD S, I n te rv e n o r - D e f e n d a n t. N o. 12- 16881

D . C . N o . 3 : 1 2 -cv -0 0 3 1 0 -R C JWGC AM ENDED O RDER

WE N D Y T O WN L E Y ; A MY WHI T L OC K; AS HL E Y G UN S ON ; HE AT HE R T HO MAS ; DA X WOO D; CASJ A LI NFORD; W ES LE Y T OWNL E Y; J E NN Y R I E DL ; T OD D DO UG AN ; B R UC E WOOD B UR Y; N o. 12- 16882 D . C . N o . 3 : 1 2 -cv -0 0 3 1 0 -R C JWGC 

# FI LED SEP 05 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

J AME S W. DE GR AF F E NR E I D, P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l ees, v. R O S S M I L L E R , S e c r e t a ry of S t a t e of N evada, D e f

e n d a n t, a nd K I N G SLEY ED W A RD S, I n te rv e n o r - D e f e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t.

S ubm i tt e d t o M ot i ons P a ne l S e pt e m be r4, 2012 B efo re: R E IN H A R D T , W A R D L A W , an d B E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T he order i ss ued S ept em ber 4, 20 12 i s her eby am ended and thi s a m ended or de ri s de s i gna t e d f

orpubl i c a t i on. A p p e lla n ts R o s s M ille r , N e v a d aS e c r e ta ry o f S ta te , a n d K in g s le y E d w a r d s , a N evada vot er , appeal fr om the di stri ctcourt ’ s pre l i m i naryi nj un ct i on order en j o i n i n g N ev ad a’ s n earl y 3 7 -year-o l d st atu t e th atreq u i res a “ N o n e o f T h ese C andi dat es ” opt i on on the bal l oti n st at ew i de el ec t i on s f or st at e or f

eder al offi ce .3

T he di s tr i c tc ourte nt e r e d i t s pr e l i m i na ry i nj unc t i on or de r , da t e d A ugus t22, 2 0 1 2 , o n A u g u s t 2 4 , 2 0 1 2 . T h e p r e lim in a ry in ju n c tio n o r d e rr e a d s in p a r t: [T ] he C ou rtgrant s [ D ocketN um ber] 15 M ot i on for P re l i m i nary [I] n j u n ct i o n . D efen d an tS ecret ary o f S t at e R o ss M i l l er, h i s ag en t s, em pl oyee s, af

fi l i at es , and al l tho se ac t i ng i n con ce rtw i th h i m , ar e e nj oi ned fro m al l o w i n g “ N o n e o f th ese can d i d at es” t o ap p ear o n v o t i n g b al l o t s. [ D e f e nda nt ’ s c ouns e l ] ’ s or a l m ot i on t o s t a y pe ndi ng appe a l i s de ni e d. W r itte n ru lin g o f

th e C o u rt w ill is s u e . C o u r t a d jo u rn s . ( e m p h a s is o m itte d ) . T he no t i ce s of app ea l of the grantof the prel i m i naryi nj un ct i on w er e f i l ed i m m e di a t e l y the r e a f

t e r , on A ugus t24 a nd 25, 2012. T he f i l i ng of the s e not i c e s of appe a l , c ons ol i da t e d by thi s c ourton A ugus t28, 2012, di ve s t e d the di s tr i c tc ourtof ju r is d ic tio n o v e rth e p r e lim in a ry in ju n c tio n . See G ri

ggs v . P rovi dentC on sum er D is c . C o. , 4 5 9 U .S . 5 6 ( 1 9 8 2 ) ; D avis v . U ni ted Stat es , 667 F . 2d 822 ( 9th C i r . 1982) (f i l i ng of a not i ce of appeal general l y di vest s the di stri ctcourtof j uri sdi ct i on ov er the m a tt e r s appe a l e d, a l though the di s tr i c tc our tm a y a c tt o a s s i s tthe c our tof ap p eal s i n th e ex erci se o f i t s j u d g m en t ). W e th erefo re h av e j u ri sd i ct i o n o v er th ese4

appeal s f rom the di stri ctcourt ’ s A ug ust22 , 20 12 and A ug ust24 , 20 12 orders g r a n tin g ap p e lle e s ’ m o tio n f o rp r e lim in a ry in

ju n c tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) . A ppe l l a nt s ’ e m e r ge nc y m ot i ons t o s t a y the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s A ugus t22, 2012 o r d e rp e n d in g ap p e a l a r e g r a n te d . Se e W in te rv . N a tu r a l R e s . D e

f. C o u n c il, I

n c ., 55 5 U . S . 7 (20 08 ). A pp el l antR oss M i l l er ’ s m ot i on for l eave t o fi l e an o vers i ze d em er gency m o tio n to s ta y th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s A u g u s t 2 2 , 2 0 1 2 o r d e ris g r a n te d . A p p el l ees’ m o t i o n fo r l eav e t o fi l e an o v ersi zed o p p o si t i o n t o ap p el l an t s’ e m e r g e n c y m o tio n s to s ta y th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s A u g u s t 2 2 , 2 0 1 2 o r d e ris g r a n te d . T h e b r ie f in g s c h e d u le e s tab lis h e d p r e v io u s ly s h a ll r e m a in in e f f e c t.

J U D G E R E I N H A R D T , C onc urr i ng: I c on cur f

ul l y i n thi s c ou rt ’ s order , i ncl ud i ng i t s det erm i nat i on thatthi s c ou rt h a s ju r is d ic tio n o v e rth e ap p e a ls f r o m th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s p r e lim in a ry in ju n c tio n . I w r i t e s e pa r a t e l y onl y t o a dd tha tthe r e i s a n a l t e rna t i ve ba s i s f orourj ur i s di c t i on ov erthe appeal s— a bas i s thatw ou l d exi steven i f the di stri ctj ud ge had n otent er ed hi s m i nut e or de ri s s ui ng the pr e l i m i na ry i nj unc t i on.5

B e f o r e d o in g s o , h o w e v e r , I w is h to m a k e c le a rth a t th e p a n e l is in agre em entthatthe basi s f or ou r gra ntof the st ayof the di stri ctcourt ’ s order pur s ua ntt o W

i nt erv. N aturalR es . D ef

. C ou nci l , Inc. , 555 U . S . 7 ( 2008) , i s tha tthe l i kel i ho od of succ es s on the m er i t s f avors the st at e. P l ai nt i ff s’ ar gu m ent s off

eran in a d e q u a te b a s is f

o rth is c o u rt to c o n c lu d e th a t N e v a d a ’s 3 7 - y e a r - o ld s ta tu te pr ovi di ng f

or“ N one of

the s e c a ndi da t e s ” ba l l ot s i s c ontr a ryt o the C ons t i tut i on or t o a nyf e de r a l s t a tut e . A f

a i l ur e t o s t a y f

or thw i th a ny i nj unc t i on i s s ue d by the di s tr i c tc ourtw oul d a c c or di ngl y r e s ul ti n i rr e pa r abl e i nj ury t o the S t a t e of N e va da a n d its c itiz e n s , a n d w o u ld b e d ir e c tly c o n tr a ry to th e p u b lic in te r e s t. T he part i es have advi se d b oth thi s c ou rtand the di stri ctcourtthat , i n o rder for N evadans i n the m i l i t ary t o cas tthei r bal l ot s i n the forthcom i ng P re si dent i al el ec t i on , the com pl ex process of pri nt i ng the st at ew i de bal l ot s m ustbe com pl et ed n o l at er th an S ep t em b er 2 2 , 2 0 1 2 , an d th atth e p ri n t i n g o f al l su ch b al l o t s m u st begi n b y S e p te m b e r7 , 2 0 1 2 . A lth o u g h th e d is tr ic t ju d g e a c k n o w le d g e d h is aw ar enes s of these fa ct s, he has del i bera t el y a tt em pt ed t o avo i d ent er i ng any order tha tw oul d a l l ow a n appe a l be f or e tha tda t e . H i s di l a t ory t a c t i c s appe a rt o s e rve no purpos e othe rtha n t o s e e k t o pr e ve ntthe s t a t e f r om t a ki ng a n appe a l of hi s de c i s i on be f or e i tm us tpr i ntthe ba l l ot s . A s s e tf or th be l ow , the s e a tt e m pt s t o f rus tr a t e the j u ri sd i ct i o n o f th e ap p el l at e co u rt , an d , n ecessaril y, th e S u p rem e C o u rt

— atl east6

unt i l the i s s ue i n thi s c a s e i s m oot e d— i t s e l f c ons t i tut e s as uf

f i c i e ntba s i s f

orour e x e r c is e o f

ju r is d ic tio n . T he di s tr i c tj udge ’ s i nt e ntt o e va de appe l l a t e r e vi e w i s pl a i n f r om the r e c or d. I nde e d, the di s tr i c tj udge e s s e nt i a l l y a dm i tt e d a s m uc h, a s e vi de nc e d by the tr a ns c r i ptof

the he a r i ng he l d A ugus t22, 2012, r e ga r di ng the m ot i on f or pr e l i m i na ry i nj unc t i on. A ttha the a r i ng, c ouns e l f orthe s t a t e r e que s t e d tha tthe di s tr i c tj udge rul e i n t i m e t o pe rm i ta n appe a l t o the N i nth C i r c ui tbe f or e the ba l l ot d e a d lin e ; th e d is tr ic t ju d g e , h o w e v e r , d is p la y e d n o in te r e s t in D e f e n d a n ts ’ ab ility to ap p e a l: M R . B E N S O N : W e ll, w e h a v e ap r o b le m in th e p r o c e d u r a l s e n s e in tha ti f w e - - i n or de rt o ge tt o the N i nth C i r c ui tbe tw e e n now a nd S ept em ber 7th -- T H E C O U R T : W e ll, th a t's y o u rp r o b le m . I ’m ju s t try in g to ac com m od at e y ou r probl em w i th regar d t o n ot i fy i ng the pri nt er . A l though the di s tr i c tj udge ’ s r e s pons e w a s e nt i r e l y outof ke e pi ng w i th the im p o r ta n c e a n d tim e s e n s itiv e n e s s o f th is c a s e , it, a lo n e , w o u ld n o t s u f f ic e to e v id e n c e d e lib e r a te d e la y .P l a i nt i f

f s s pe c i f i c a l l y r e que s t e d e xpe di t e d tr e a tm e ntof the pr e l i m i na ry i nj unc t i on, m arki ng thei r m ot i on “ E X P E D IT E D T R E A T M E N T R E Q U E S T E D . ” T he part i es a l s o f i l e d ar e que s tf

ora n e xpe di t e d br i e f

i ng s c he dul e . T he y f

ur the re xpl a i ne d the i m po rt ance of an expedi t i ou s rul i ng du ri ng the oral hear i ng on the prel i m i nary i nj unc t i on m ot i on. 7 T h e co u rt ’ s co m m en t , h o w ev er, fo l l o w edn u m ero u s an d su b st an t i al d el ays c au s e d b y th e d is tr ic t ju d g e , w h ic h , in th e f a c e o f e f f o r ts b y b o th p a r tie s to e x p e d ite c ons i de r a t i on of

the m a tt e r , c a n onl y be e xpl a i ne d a s ade l i be r a t e a tt e m ptt o e va de r e v ie w b y h ig h e rc o u rts . F o re x a m p le , w h e n th e d is tr ic t ju d g e w h o h a d o r ig in a lly be e n a s s i gne d t o thi s c a s e w i thdr e w f r om the c a s e on J une 11, 2012, the c urr e nt di s tr i c tj udge a s C hi e f

J udge t ook unt i l J ul y 3, 2012, t o r e a s s i gn the c a s e — a nd, w hen h e di d so, he re as si gn ed i tt o h i m se l f. T he re sul t antdel ayhad the prej ud i ci al e f f e c tof r e nde r i ng m ootthe pa rt i e s ’ r e que s tf ore xpe di t e d br i e f

i ng. F ur the r , the d is tr ic t ju d g e th e n w a ite d a lm o s t th r e e w e e k s , u n til J u ly 2 0 , 2 0 1 2 , to e v e n s c h e d u le ahe a r i ng on the pr e l i m i na ry i nj unc t i on. T he da t e he e ve ntua l l y c hos e — A ugus t22, 2012— r e s ul t e d i n a nothe rm onth- l ong de l a y i n the r e s ol ut i on of thi s pr oc e e di ng. A t th e A u g u s t 2 2 , 2 0 1 2 , h e a r in g , th e p a r tie s o n c e a g a in u r g e d th e c o u r t to i s s ue i t s rul i ng a s s oon a s pos s i bl e ; i n r e s pons e , the di s tr i c tj udge a s s ur e d the p art i es th ath e w o u l d ru l e q u i ck l y: MR . B E NS ON : Wi th r e g a r d t o p r e p a r i n g th e o r d e ra n d a l l o f th a t , we h a v e ab a llo t d e a d lin e , p r in tin g d e a d lin e c o m in g u p v e ry q u ic k ly .8

T HE C OU R T : T h a t ’ s wh y I ’ m a n n o u n c i n g th i s o r a l l y n o w. M R . B E N S O N : I app re ci at e that , your H on or. T H E C O U R T : E ven tho ug h I w ou l d l i ke m ore t i m e t o stud y i t , bu t-- M R. BEN SO N : A n d w i th r e g a r d t o th e w r i tt e n o r d e r , my u n d e r s ta n d in g is th a t a n ap p e a l c a n n o t b e ta k e n u n til aw r itte n o r d e ris pu ti n the re cord so -- T H E C O U R T : R i ght . I ’ l l try t o do tha ta s qui c kl y a s I c a n.

A s s e t f o r th in th e d is tr ic t ju d g e ’s r e c e n t o r d e rin r e s p o n s e to th e n o tic e s o f ap p e a l, how e ve r , the di s tr i c tj udge ha s s o f a rr e f us e d t o i s s ue af

ul l y - r e a s one d e xpl a na t i on f o rh is p r e lim in a ry in

ju n c tio n ( ap r e c o n d itio n , u n d e rh is v ie w , f o rap p e lla te re vi ew ). D es pi t e hi s prom i se t o rul e “ qu i ckl y, ” m ore than a m on th h as pass ed si nce the c om pl e t i on of

br i e f i ng on tha ti s s ue — a nd 13 da y s ha ve pa s s e d s i nc e the A u g u st2 2 h eari n g — w i th o u tsu ch a reaso n ed ru l i n g . Iti s n o w th ree w o rkd ays before the pri nt i ng of bal l ot s m ustcom m ence , and the di stri ctj ud ge has e xh i bi t ed n o s ig n s o f

is s u in g th e w r itte n e x p la n a tio n th a t h e b e lie v e s is e s s e n tia l f o rap p e lla te r e v i e w. T h e d istrict j u d g e w as fu ll y a w ar e th at h is ef fo rts m ig h t aff

ec t th is co u rt’s j ur i s di c t i on a nd tha tD e f e nda nt s w e r e s e e ki ng appe l l a t e r e vi e w of hi s de c i s i on.B efo re req u est i n g a st ay fro m th i s co u rt , th e p art i es are req u i red ei th er t o req u est

one f r om the di s tr i c tc ourtorde m ons tr a t e w hy s e e ki ng s uc h as t a y w oul d be im p r a c tic ab le . See F ed . R . A p p . P . 8 (a). H ere, b o th ap p l y. 9 In d eed , h i s recen tp o st -ap p eal o rd er n o t es th e n o t i ces o f ap p eal fi l ed b y th e p art i es, a nd de s c r i be s the m a s “ pr e m a tur e . ” I n a nye ve nt , hi s a w a r e ne s s di d notputa n e nd t o hi s a tt e m pt s t o e va de appe l l a t e r e vi e w . W he n the appe a l s w e r e f i l e d, he im m e d ia te ly s o u g h t to f ru s tr a te o u rab ility to e n te r ta in as ta y p e n d in g ap p e a l, d e n y in g th a t h e h a d is s u e d a n o r d e rb u t s c h e d u lin g ah e a r in g o n w h e th e rh e s h o u ld gr a ntas t a y of

tha tor de rf

orS e pt e m be r14, 2012— f ul l y aw e e k a

f ter th e s tate’s d e a d lin e f

o rp r in tin g th e b a llo ts

— ah e a r in g th a t h e d e e m e d ap r e c o n d itio n to th is c o u r t’s “e n te rta in m e n t” o f as ta y m o tio n . T h is la s t a c tio n b y th e d is tr ic t ju d g e is pa r t i c ul a r l y e gr e gi ous i n l i ghtof the f a c ttha the s w i f

t l y de ni e d or a l m ot i ons f ortheT he di s tr i c tj udge w a s pr e s e nt e d w i th tw o s uc h m ot i ons f oras t a y dur i ng the A ugus t22, 2012, he a r i ng, a nd de ni e d the m both t i m e s w i thoute qui voc a t i on. T he fi rs tt i m e w as up on m ot i on of the st at e: T H E C O U R T : B utthe re as on I’ m anno un ci ng thi s ora l l y i s s o that y o u ’ r e f o r e w a rn e d w i th r e g a r d t o th e p r i n t i n g p r o b l e m. M R . B E N S O N : A nd , fi nal l y, w i th regard t o that , I m ustt ake a n o ra l m o tio n th a t th e C o u rt s ta y its o r d e rp e n d in g ap p e a l. W e d o in te n d to ta k e a n ap p e a l. T H E C O U R T : I ’ll d e n y th a t. M R . B E N S O N : T hank you, your H on or. T H E C O U R T : S o y ou ha ve i tf orthe r e c or d. L a t e r , i n r e s pons e t o am ot i on by D e f e nda nt - I nt e rve nor , the c our ta ga i n de ni e d the s t a y , s t a t i ng, “ I ’ l l de ny tha tf orthe r e c or d so th a t

yo u ca n a sk th e a

p p el la te co u rt f ora s tay ” (em p h asi s ad d ed ). In d eed , th e d i stri ctco u rt ’ s o rd ers o n th i s p o i n tare so c ontr a di c t ory tha tthe s t a t e t oda y f i l e d am ot i on w i th the di s tr i c tc our tt o c l a r i f y the p reci se st at e o f th e reco rd reg ard i n g b o th th e p rel i m i n ary i n j u n ct i o n an d th e st ay. 10 pr e c i s e s a m e s t ay ( m a de by both s e t s of D e f e nda nt s ) dur i ng the A ugus t22, 2012, he a r i ng. I n c ir c u m s ta n c e s s u c h a s th e s e , w h e n ad is tr ic t ju d g e ’s a c tio n s m ig h t s e rv e to de pr i ve the appe l l a t e c ourtof m e a ni ngf

ul j udi c i a l r e vi e w , a n appe l l a t e c our tha s the au th o ri ty t o ex erci se j u ri sd i ct i o n i n ai d o f i t s o w n ap p el l at e j u ri sd i ct i o n . T h i s i s so e ve n i f a n appe a l ha s noty e tbe e n pr ope r l y pe r f e c t e d. I n F TCv . D e an Foods , C o. , f o re x a m p le , th e S u p r e m e C o u rt u p h e ld th e c o u r t o f ap p e a ls ’s au th o r ity to g r a n t a pr e l i m i na ry i nj unc t i on pr e ve nt i ng am e r ge rtha tw oul d m oota ny s ubs e que nt appe a l . 384 U . S . 597, 603- 05 ( 1966) . T he C our tnot e d tha t , “ w he r e a n appe a l i s not11

th en p en d i n g b u tm ay b e l at er p erfected,” an ap p el l at e co u rtm ay ex erci se ju r is d ic tio n w h e n d o in g s o w o u ld b e n e c e s s a ry to p r e s e rv e its la te rap p e lla te ju r is d ic tio n . I

d. a t 6 0 3 . T h e ab ility o f ap p e lla te tr ib u n a ls to a c t to p r e s e rv e th e ir ju r is d ic tio n is an e c e s s a ry e le m e n t o f ap p e lla te r e v ie w ; “ [

o ] th e rw is e th e a

p p e lla te j u risd i ct i o n co u ld

b e def ea ted . . . b y u n a u th o ri

zed a ct i o n o f th e d istri ct

co u rt obs tr uc t i ng the appe al . ” R oche v. E vapo rated Mi lk A ss ’n , 319 U . S . 21, 25 ( 1943) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ) ; s e e al s o C al i f orni a E ne r

gy C om m ’ n v . J

ohns on , 767 F . 2d 631, 63 4 (9th C i r. 19 85 ) ( re i t er at i ng thi s pri nci pl e butdecl i ni ng t o exerci se such j uri sdi ct i on ). W h e n ad e c is io n o n o u rp a r t is n e c e s s a ry in o r d e rto p e rm it th e lo s in g p a rty b e lo w to o b ta in r e v ie w b y o u rc o u r t a n d th e S u p r e m e C o u r t, w e h a v e th e ab ility to ac ti n o rdert o p re se rve the j uri sdi ct i on of the appel l at e c ou rt s. In thi s c as e, that autho ri ty w ou l d p erm i tus t o d ec i de the st aym ot i on before us, even i f the di stri ct c our tha d noti s s ue d the i nj unc t i on on A ugus t24. R e f us a l t o e xe r c i s e our j ur i s di c t i on w oul d f

rus tr a t e notonl y ourappe l l a t e author i ty , buta l s o tha tof the S u p r e m e C o u rt, a n d w o u ld a llo w th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to e rr o n e o u s ly in v a lid a te N e v a d a ’s lo n g - s ta n d in g e le c tio n p r o c e s s a n d to d e p r iv e its c itiz e n s o f th e irr ig h t to part i ci pat e i n P re si dent i al el ec t i on s i n the m anner thatthe l aw pres cr i bes. S uchI n a ny e ve nt , i f the di s tr i c tc our tw e r e t o s uc c e e d t e m por a r i l y i n bl oc ki ng appel l at e j uri sdi ct i on as a r es ul tof i t s c on t ent i on thati thas noti ss ued an i n j u n ct i o n , th e st at e w o u l d b e free to co m m en ce p ri n t i n g th e b al l o t s i m m ed i at el y. A n y s u b s e q u e n t a tte m p t to d is ru p t th a t p r in tin g w o u ld b e s u b je c t to a n im m e d ia te st ayas the w ei gh i ng of the W i nt erfa ct ors w ou l d favor the st at e e ven m ore stro n g l y. 12 a rr oga nc e a nd a s s um pt i on of pow e rby one i ndi vi dua l i s nota c c e pt abl e i n our j u d i c i a l s y s t e m. I th erefo re w h o l eh eart ed l y co n cu r i n th e p an el ’ s d eci si o n t o g ran tth e st ay.13 C o uns e lLi s t i ng K . K evi n B enson, C ar son C i ty, N evada, fi l ed the m ot i on for s t ayof the di stri ct c o u r t’s o r d e rf

o rap p e lla n t- d e f

e n d a n t R o s s M ille r , S e c r e ta ry o f S ta te o f N e v a d a . C a the r i ne C ort e z M a s t o, N e va daA tt orne y G e ne r a l , w a s a l s o on the m ot i on. John P abl o P arri s, L as V egas , N evada, fi l ed the m ot i on for s t ayof the di stri ct c o u r t’s o r d e rf

o rap p e lla n t- in te rv e n o r - d e f e n d a n t K in g s le y E d w a r d s . P aul S w enson P ri or, L as V egas , N evada, op po se d the m ot i on for s t ayof the di stri ct court ’ s orderfor pl ai nt i ff s- appel l ee s W endy T ow nl ey , A m y W hi t l ock, A shl ey G uns on, H e a the rT hom a s , D a x W ood, C a s j aL i nf or d, W e s l e y T ow nl e y , J e nny R i e dl , T odd D ouga n, B ruc e W oodbury , a n d J a m e s W . D e gr a f f e nr e i d.