Proceedings

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 DISTRICT OF OREGON

 KELSEY CASCADIA ROSE JULIANA, )

 et al., )

 Plaintiffs, )

 v. )No. 6:15-cv-01517-AA

 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

 et al., )

 Defendants. )

 ORAL ARGUMENT

 BEFORE THE HONORABLE ANN AIKEN

 Friday

 June 25, 2021

 10:00 A.M.

 APPEARANCES:

 For Plaintiffs: Ms. Julia Olson

 Mr. Philip Gregory

 Ms. Andrea Rodgers

 For Defendants: Mr. Sean Duffy

 Mr. Frank Singer

 REPORTED BY: Ms. Eleanor G. Knapp, RPR-CSR

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 1 of 67
Proceedings

2

1 JUNE 25, 2021

2 Friday

3 10:00 A.M.

4 THE CLERK: Now is the time set for

5 Civil Case Number 15-1517, Juliana, et al., v.

6 United States of America, et al., for oral argument.

7 If you could please introduce yourselves for the

8 record, beginning with Plaintiffs.

9 MS. OLSON: Good morning, Your Honor.

10 This is Julia Olson on behalf of the plaintiffs.

11 MR. GREGORY: Good morning, Your

12 Honor. This is Philip Gregory on behalf of the

13 plaintiffs.

14 MS. RODGERS: And good morning, Your

15 Honor. This is Andrea Rodgers on behalf of the

16 plaintiffs.

17 MR. DUFFY: Good morning, Your Honor.

18 This is Sean Duffy on behalf of the defendants.

19 MR. SINGER: Good morning, Your Honor.

20 This is Frank Singer on behalf of the United States.

21 THE COURT: Thank you all. I believe

22 that's all that I expect on this call. Is that

23 correct, Cathy?

24 THE CLERK: Yes, that is everyone,

25 Judge. Thank you.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 2 of 67
Proceedings

3

1 THE COURT: Thank you. I have

2 reviewed all the materials that have been submitted.

3 Ms. Olson, this is your motion to

4 amend, so I'm happy to hear any additional argument

5 you wish to make. Go ahead.

6 MS. OLSON: Thank you, Your Honor.

7 Good morning. May it please the Court, this is

8 Julia Olson on behalf of the plaintiffs, many of

9 whom are on the public call-in line today. We want

10 to thank Your Honor and the court staff for

11 providing the plaintiffs and the public the ability

12 to listen at a time when we cannot all gather at

13 person at the courthouse.

14 I would like to reserve five to ten

15 minutes for rebuttal with this Court's permission.

16 THE COURT: We don't stand on those

17 kind of technical time limits. So if you want to

18 respond, you'll be able to do that. Don't think

19 it's confined to that period of time. All right?

20 MS. OLSON: Thank you, Your Honor.

21 Your Honor, how our nation's children

22 and adults speak, move, love, vote, worship,

23 assemble, learn, and behave in our world is a

24 function of the rights we hold and those we are

25 denied. For our rights to endure in the face of

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 3 of 67
Proceedings

4

1 government policy threats, they need to be declared.

2 Do children have a right to free

3 speech on Snapchat when they aren't in school even

4 if that speech is profane? On Wednesday, eight

5 Supreme Court justices said yes, they do. The

6 Supreme Court issued a declaration of constitutional

7 law in Mahoney Area School District v. B.L.

8 THE COURT: May I interrupt for a

9 second? I apologize. But if you're not speaking,

10 would everyone else put their phone on mute. I

11 started to hear people talking, and it's difficult

12 enough to hear on these phone conference calls

13 generally. For the court reporter, it's even more

14 difficult. So again, please, everybody mute your

15 phone if you're not speaking.

16 And I apologize, Ms. Olson, for

17 interrupting. Please go ahead.

18 MS. OLSON: Thank you. That

19 declaration in Mahoney of a student's constitutional

20 rights isn't just about one 14-year-old cheerleader,

21 who is now in college. It's about the First

22 Amendment rights of children across the country.

23 It's also about the line where government interests

24 -- in that case, the public schools -- unjustly

25 invade those constitutionally protected rights.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 4 of 67
Proceedings

5

1 Only our courts can declare those constitutional

2 rights and define those constitutional lines in a

3 final judgment for all.

4 Nearly 80 years ago in West Virginia

5 State Board of Education v. Barnette, the Supreme

6 Court also protected children who were in school

7 exercising their free speech and freedom of

8 religious expression, and the Court declared their

9 rights.

10 In 2005 in Roper v. Simmons, the

11 Supreme Court invoked the Eighth Amendment rights of

12 young people convicted of crimes and finally

13 declared that children cannot be sentenced to death.

14 In 2012 in Miller v. Alabama, the

15 Court said rarely should children be sentenced to

16 life without the possibility of parole. Since that

17 declaration of constitutional law in Miller, 31

18 states and the District of Columbia either banned

19 life without parole for children or have no children

20 serving that sentence. That declaration of rights

21 had real life consequences, not just for Evan

22 Miller, but many other children.

23 This term the Supreme Court clarified

24 when life without parole for Evan Miller and other

25 children may be permitted and when it deprives them

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 5 of 67
Proceedings

6

1 of fundamental rights under the Eighth Amendment.

2 And that new constitutional declaration and

3 clarification will also have profound consequences

4 for convicted children around the country, affecting

5 their entire life trajectory.

6 Only our courts can judge and declare

7 those constitutional rights and define those

8 constitutional lines. And those declaratory

9 judgments of our courts matter immensely.

10 21 children and young people are here

11 today to argue over whether they are entitled to

12 file an amended complaint that seeks primarily an

13 adjudication of whether they too have

14 constitutionally protected rights that have been

15 invaded by their government and where the line is of

16 that invasion or deprivation.

17 While this Second Amended Complaint is

18 not about First Amendment speech or Eighth Amendment

19 cruel and unusual punishment, the rights of Kelsey,

20 the eldest, and Levi, the youngest, and the 19 youth

21 in between are located in and protected by the Fifth

22 Amendment. And they are no less vital to their

23 freedom and their pursuit of happiness, the rights

24 to life and to personal security and to be free of

25 government-imposed danger, the right to family

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 6 of 67
Proceedings

7

1 autonomy, the right to a climate system that

2 sustains human life, the right to equal protection

3 of the law, and the right to public trust resources

4 are all at least as deeply rooted in the history of

5 our nation, as fundamental to our liberty as the

6 rights some people seek to own an AR-15 assault

7 weapon.

8 But just this month in Miller v.

9 Bonta, a federal judge in the Southern District of

10 California declared unconstitutional policies

11 banning children and adults from owning assault

12 weapons.

13 Our federal courts allow people

14 standing to assert their alleged fundamental rights

15 when they have real injuries in order to challenge

16 government policies that cause those injuries and

17 then have those rights adjudicated.

18 A declaration of rights and

19 constitutional limits on government policies very

20 often have significant ramifications because it

21 changes the legal relationship between all of us and

22 our government. It affects how we live our lives,

23 our dignity, and our physical security. Some

24 people, Your Honor, want to protect the right of

25 self-defense via alleged constitutional rights to

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 7 of 67
Proceedings

8

1 assault weapons, and they have standing to walk

2 through the courthouse doors and receive a

3 declaration on that issue.

4 These young people before you today

5 want to protect their lives and personal security

6 too. And they also have standing to receive a

7 declaration of their rights and the constitutional

8 limits on government policies when their government

9 is actively threatening their self-preservation.

10 So while we are here on a routine

11 motion to amend a prior complaint to correct a

12 perceived defect that was found by the Ninth

13 Circuit, the outcome of this routine motion has

14 monumental implications for whether justice is

15 served.

16 Here, where the law of the case is

17 that the subject matter of Plaintiffs' complaint --

18 the nation's energy system policies and practices

19 and the plaintiffs' Fifth Amendment claims against

20 that system -- are not barred by the political

21 question doctrine, it would be manifestly unjust and

22 contrary to Article III and the nearly century-old

23 act of Congress not to allow these children and

24 youth to access our judiciary to seek a declaration

25 of their constitutional rights and the line at which

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 8 of 67
Proceedings

9

1 those rights are infringed by their government.

2 That declaration alone, even if no

3 further relief is available, will change the current

4 legal status of these youth. And the plain text of

5 the declaratory judgment allows for just that.

6 Even where no further relief may be

7 available, this Court may issue declaratory judgment

8 for or against the plaintiffs where they have

9 demonstrated injury, causation, and a live case or

10 controversy with their government. And nothing the

11 Ninth Circuit said on interlocutory appeal changes

12 this Court's obligation to say what the law is.

13 I want to turn now to the Rule 15(a)

14 analysis. Your Honor, based on the briefing of the

15 parties there are two primary issues for this Court

16 to resolve in order to grant Plaintiffs' motion to

17 amend.

18 First, this Court should find the

19 Ninth Circuit dismissed the First Amended Complaint

20 without prejudice.

21 Second, this Court should hold that

22 the proposed Second Amended Complaint would not be

23 futile in light of the Ninth Circuit interlocutory

24 opinion and the law governing amendments because

25 there has been no delay, no bad faith, and there

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 9 of 67
Proceedings

10

1 will be no prejudice to defendants. Plaintiffs'

2 amendment should be granted in order to comply with

3 the spirit of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)

4 to freely and liberally move meritorious cases to

5 trial and a merits judgment.

6 There is a presumption in favor of

7 amendment here that the Government has not rebutted.

8 And Eminence Capital, the Ninth Circuit case at

9 1052, stands for that.

10 So turning to the issue of prejudice,

11 the Ninth Circuit dismissal could only have been of

12 one type, and that's without prejudice. When a

13 court intends to dismiss a case with prejudice, it

14 says so. The Ninth Circuit did not do that here.

15 And most importantly, legally it could not have

16 dismissed the First Amended Complaint with prejudice

17 because it did not render a merits judgment. It did

18 not award summary judgment to Defendants, and it did

19 not find that no amendment could cure the purported

20 standing deficiency. Instead, what the Ninth

21 Circuit did on its face was dismiss the First

22 Amended Complaint for lack of subject matter

23 jurisdiction based on its view that Plaintiffs

24 lacked standing.

25 Courts are not permitted to get to the

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 10 of 67
Proceedings

11

1 merits resolution of a case when they lack

2 jurisdiction. The Government does not disagree that

3 there was no merits resolution, and they agree that

4 summary judgment was not awarded in their favor.

5 The circuit courts are unanimously in

6 agreement on this. And the courts say consistently

7 that it would actually be inappropriate for an

8 appellate court to dismiss with prejudice for lack

9 of standing. The Ninth Circuit case Fleck &

10 Associates at 471 F.3d 1106 supports that.

11 Thus, in the mandate issued to this

12 Court, the directions had to be to dismiss

13 Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint without

14 prejudice.

15 That then brings us to the futility

16 analysis. Before I address that question of

17 futility and walk through the Ninth Circuit opinion,

18 I think it's really important to talk about the

19 procedural posture of the First Amended Complaint on

20 interlocutory appeal. That procedural posture set

21 the stage for the Ninth Circuit's opinion and what

22 it did and did not do in that opinion.

23 Unlike most of the cases the

24 Government relies upon for its futility analysis

25 where Plaintiffs' complaints were dismissed by the

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 11 of 67
Proceedings

12

1 district court, in this case, as Your Honor well

2 knows, Plaintiffs won Defendants' motion to dismiss

3 and prevailed on every motion the Government made to

4 dismiss the case. So at the time of the

5 interlocutory appeal, there was no final judgment in

6 this Court as to standing. There were no findings

7 of fact. And the reason was, of course, that there

8 were disputed issues of material fact that this

9 Court needed a trial and finding of fact to resolve

10 as is the ordinary course of litigation.

11 But the Government wanted premature

12 review of those pretrial decisions. All they could

13 take up to the Ninth Circuit were this Court's

14 denials of their pretrial motions. And the Ninth

15 Circuit was only in a position to resolve the

16 arguments the Government put before them as to why

17 the case should be prematurely dismissed.

18 And this is key. The Ninth Circuit

19 focused its redressability analysis right where

20 Defendants asked it to. They asked the Ninth

21 Circuit to say that Plaintiffs' specific request for

22 a court-ordered remedial plan was outside the

23 jurisdiction of the courts and, for that reason,

24 Plaintiffs could not seek their central relief which

25 was injunctive. And therefore, the Ninth Circuit

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 12 of 67
Proceedings

13

1 said Plaintiffs had no standing.

2 The Government's opening brief on

3 interlocutory appeal never once argued that

4 Plaintiffs could not obtain declaratory relief nor

5 that declaratory relief would not provide at least

6 partial redress. They never made that argument in

7 their opening or reply brief. Thus, it's not

8 surprising that the Ninth Circuit did not analyze

9 and conclusively address whether declaratory

10 judgment sufficed for the redressability prong of

11 Plaintiffs' Article III standing.

12 And that important back story of how

13 we arrived at this moment dictates how this Court

14 should also interpret the Ninth Circuit's ruling on

15 the First Amended Complaint.

16 So going into futility, the law of the

17 case right now on standing is crucial to look at at

18 this juncture. And Plaintiffs believe the Court

19 should take the Ninth Circuit at its word as to its

20 three specific holdings. And these are quotes from

21 the Ninth Circuit opinion.

22 First, quote, The district court

23 correctly found the injury requirement met, at 1168.

24 Second, The district court correctly

25 found the Article III causation requirement

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 13 of 67
Proceedings

14

1 satisfied for purposes of summary judgment, at 1169.

2 And third, quote, It is beyond the

3 power of an Article III court to order, design,

4 supervise, or implement the plaintiffs' requested

5 remedial plan, at 1171.

6 That is the explicit law of the case

7 that was fully analyzed and briefed on standing and

8 resulted in the dismissal of the First Amended

9 Complaint.

10 With respect to the issue of whether

11 Plaintiffs could cure that deficiency, the Ninth

12 Circuit was silent. It's interlocutory opinion did

13 not address whether amendment would be futile, and

14 that remains an open question for the discretion of

15 this Court.

16 And importantly, Defendants suggest

17 that the Ninth Circuit opinion should just be pasted

18 on the Court's decision here. But that opinion was

19 only with respect to the First Amended Complaint.

20 That Court did not have Plaintiffs' proposed Second

21 Amended Complaint before it which has new requests

22 for relief and new factual allegations that must be

23 taken as true.

24 And what those allegations taken as

25 true --

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 14 of 67
Proceedings

15

1 THE COURT: I'm sorry. Ms. Olson,

2 will you step back at the beginning again of that

3 argument? I got -- you kind of cut in and out a

4 little bit. Would you go back to that, right after

5 you finished the three issues that were the holding

6 and the law of the case. So just right at the end

7 of that, would you start into that next argument? I

8 apologize. I thought I caught it all, but I really

9 want you to redo it for me.

10 MS. OLSON: Yes. Of course, Your

11 Honor. No problem.

12 So with respect to amending the

13 complaint and whether that would be futile or not,

14 the Ninth Circuit was silent. Its interlocutory

15 opinion did not address futility of amendment, and

16 that remains an open question for this Court to

17 decide and it's fully within this Court's

18 discretion.

19 The Ninth Circuit's dismissal order

20 also only applied to Plaintiffs' First Amended

21 Complaint. And now that the Second Amended

22 Complaint has a new request for relief and new

23 factual allegations that must be taken as true, the

24 order of the Court requiring dismissal of the First

25 Amended Complaint does not automatically apply to

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 15 of 67
Proceedings

16

1 the Second Amended Complaint.

2 Specifically, Plaintiffs now allege

3 for the first time in the Second Amended Complaint

4 that if this Court declares the nation's energy

5 system policies and practices unconstitutional, the

6 Government will change those policies and practices

7 to stop the constitutional violation. The

8 constitutional controversy would then be resolved,

9 and the legal status of the plaintiffs would be

10 forever altered vis-a-vis their relationship with

11 their government just as the legal status of

12 children was altered in Brown v. Board of Education

13 or in the Mahoney School District case with respect

14 to the rights -- the free speech rights of children.

15 Some of the important paragraphs in

16 the Second Amended Complaint are 95-A, 95-B,

17 paragraph 12, 276-A, and paragraph 212. And these

18 paragraphs tell the factual story that in addition

19 to the plaintiffs being injured in all of the ways

20 that have already been accepted as law of the case,

21 the plaintiffs are being injured because their

22 federal government continues to put them at greater

23 risk of even more physical and mental health harm

24 than they already experience. And that's caused by

25 the policies and practices of the national energy

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 16 of 67
Proceedings

17

1 system that are continuing and ongoing.

2 And Plaintiffs allege that if that

3 system is declared unconstitutional, Defendants

4 thereafter will abide by this Court's declaratory

5 judgment and reduce, to a meaningful extent, the

6 cause of the harm. Plaintiffs allege that

7 Defendants would abide by the decree of the Court

8 and bring the energy system into constitutional

9 compliance, redressing the substantial cause of

10 these Plaintiffs' constitutional injuries.

11 The defendants want this Court to read

12 into the interlocutory opinion an implied ruling

13 that the Ninth Circuit has barred this Court from

14 allowing the amended complaint or that the Ninth

15 Circuit is barring this Court from issuing

16 declaratory judgment. But that reading of the Ninth

17 Circuit opinion, Your Honor, asks you to ignore what

18 the Court explicitly said was the central issue

19 before it. And that's a quote at page 1164 and -65

20 of the interlocutory opinion.

21 The central issue before the Court was

22 whether an Article III court can provide the

23 plaintiffs the redress they seek, an order requiring

24 the Government to develop a plan to phase out fossil

25 fuel emissions. So that central issue was

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 17 of 67
Proceedings

18

1 injunctive relief, and that is what the Court

2 addressed. Declaratory judgment was not the issue

3 that the defendants put before the Ninth Circuit,

4 and it wasn't the issue the Ninth Circuit was

5 focused on addressing.

6 This Court in Hampton v Steen

7 explained that leave to amend should be denied only

8 when it is clear that the complaint cannot be saved

9 by any amendment and that a district court should

10 not read into an appellate mandate language that is

11 not there, particularly when doing so would result

12 in a manifest injustice. This Court specifically

13 wrote at page 2 of your opinion in Hampton, "When a

14 court is presented with new law, new facts, or

15 otherwise changed circumstances, it has discretion

16 to rule afresh."

17 Here there is new law, there are new

18 facts, and changed circumstances all present. And

19 the combination of these factors justify allowing

20 the Second Amended Complaint to proceed.

21 And importantly in this Rule 15(a)

22 analysis, it's Defendants' burden to prove

23 otherwise. So going to Defendants' burden on the

24 law of the declaratory judgment, first Defendants

25 must squarely address the law on whether declaratory

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 18 of 67
Proceedings

19

1 judgment as set forth in Plaintiffs' Second Amended

2 Complaint is sufficient for Article III standing.

3 The burden to prove that declaratory

4 judgment could not be awarded is theirs at this

5 stage. Yet they do not grapple with the most

6 pertinent case law in their brief. Defendants

7 ignore the MedImmune case of the Supreme Court,

8 which sets the case or controversy standard for

9 obtaining a declaratory judgment. They never once

10 argued that declaratory -- sorry, Your Honor.

11 THE COURT: You cut out. So again,

12 can you start back in your argument? You just cut

13 out.

14 MS. OLSON: Yes. I apologize, Your

15 Honor.

16 THE COURT: No. That's the nature of

17 doing these hearings remotely.

18 MS. OLSON: Yes. So on the point of

19 whether declaratory judgment can be awarded in this

20 constitutional rights case, it's Defendants' burden

21 to show that declaratory judgment could never be

22 awarded. And they don't grapple with the most

23 pertinent case law on that issue.

24 For example, they ignore entirely the

25 MedImmune case of the Supreme Court which sets the

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 19 of 67
Proceedings

20

1 case or controversy standard for obtaining a

2 declaratory judgment under the Declaratory Judgment

3 Act. Defendants never argue that declaratory

4 judgment cannot suffice for standing. And they

5 don't explain how the plain language of the

6 Declaratory Judgment Act doesn't mean that even when

7 no other relief is available, Plaintiffs can get a

8 declaration of their rights and the wrongdoing of

9 the Government as long as there is a live

10 controversy between the parties and there is injury

11 and causation.

12 The defendants also don't fully

13 grapple with the analysis in the Uzuegbunam v.

14 Preczewski case that was recently decided. That

15 case clearly says that where there is an injury and

16 where there is causation in a constitutional case,

17 that even where the injury and causation no longer

18 exist, that a nominal damage of one dollar is enough

19 for the redressability prong of Article III standing

20 because that one dollar acts as a form of

21 declaratory relief.

22 They don't respond to the Supreme

23 Court's clear ruling that at common law nominal

24 damages acted as the equivalent of declaratory

25 judgment before declaratory judgment acts existed.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 20 of 67
Proceedings

21

1 THE COURT: May I interrupt? My

2 understanding of your amendment is that you are

3 asking for the declaratory relief along with the

4 nominal damages. Am I correct about that?

5 MS. OLSON: Your Honor, we have not

6 asked for nominal damages. We could amend the

7 complaint to do that, but we think that in this

8 case, because we have an ongoing and live

9 controversy with the Government, that declaratory

10 judgment is the appropriate remedy. A nominal

11 damage remedy would only be appropriate here if the

12 Government rescinded and corrected the energy

13 policies that are causing the constitutional

14 violation as the Government had done so in

15 Uzuegbunam.

16 THE COURT: Because that intervening

17 Supreme Court case changes somewhat the complexion

18 of everything, I'm just suggesting that out of an

19 abundance of analysis and saving, perhaps, future

20 sets of motions, that you might want to have that in

21 your complaint in the alternative -- and/or. You

22 know, I'm just thinking of that Supreme Court case

23 and wanting to make sure that we don't ignore sort

24 of the direction the Supreme Court gave in that

25 case. Just -- that's why I asked. I didn't see

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 21 of 67
Proceedings

22

1 that that was in your amended complaint.

2 Anyway, go ahead and with your

3 argument.

4 MS. OLSON: Thank you, Your Honor. We

5 think that paragraph 4 of the prayer for relief

6 includes the ability of the Court to award nominal

7 damages, but we can also amend that into the

8 complaint expressly.

9 So in addition to not grappling with

10 the clear law under the Declaratory Judgment Act and

11 under Article III standing where there are abundant

12 new cases from the Supreme Court this term, the

13 defendants also don't address or meet their burden

14 to prove futility with respect to the new factual

15 allegations that are in the Second Amended

16 Complaint.

17 They must argue that it is clear

18 beyond doubt that declaratory judgment would not

19 provide any redress of Plaintiffs' injuries, and the

20 Ninth Circuit has held that in the Center for

21 Biological Diversity v. Veneman case at page 1114.

22 The Government here does not contend

23 that it will not change its energy policy and

24 practices if the Court awards this (unintelligible)

25 here, a declaration of their rights and a

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 22 of 67
Proceedings

23

1 declaration of the Government's constitutional

2 violation in carrying out that system.

3 They also don't contest the new

4 factual allegations that when the Government

5 corrects its constitutional violations that

6 significant risks of ongoing and worsening harm to

7 Plaintiffs will abate. Their silence on these

8 points does not meet their burden to prove up

9 futility. And in fact, Defendants, throughout the

10 course of these six years of litigation, have

11 consistently sought to ignore the important redress

12 of declaratory judgment in the constitutional

13 controversy and in this case. They ignored it on

14 interlocutory appeal, and they are trying to

15 sidestep it here as well.

16 But Brown v. Board of Education is

17 still good law. And in 1954 the Supreme Court said

18 that the first and most important question was

19 declaring the rights of the children to equal

20 integrated education.

21 So the proper interpretation of any

22 ambiguity in the Ninth Circuit interlocutory opinion

23 must be one that is consistent with Article III, the

24 Declaratory Judgment Act, and Supreme Court

25 precedent interpreting and setting the law for how

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 23 of 67
Proceedings

24

1 the lower courts should view their obligations to

2 hear cases.

3 The amended factual allegations. We

4 allege that the Government will comply with the

5 Court's order. And that's also backed up not just

6 by the factual allegations but by the law of the

7 Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court in the Evans and

8 Eu cases cited in our brief.

9 So just to be really clear, because I

10 think the Ninth Circuit opinion and how it treats

11 declaratory relief and, of course, predominantly

12 injunctive relief is something that Your Honor has

13 to wrestle with, and what the rule of mandate case

14 has made clear is that this Court can decide any

15 issue that the Ninth Circuit is silent on or did not

16 lay to rest.

17 The dismissal by the Ninth Circuit was

18 not a blanket dismissal. It did not -- that Court

19 did not address every aspect of this Court's prior

20 order. It was limited to the reasons it stated.

21 And on this motion to amend, we don't need to argue

22 whether the Ninth Circuit got it right or got it

23 wrong. We need to look at what they didn't consider

24 and did not rule on.

25 So I want to walk through this list of

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 24 of 67
Proceedings

25

1 what the Ninth Circuit is silent on.

2 The Ninth Circuit was silent on

3 whether amendment would be futile.

4 They were silent on the Declaratory

5 Judgment Act and never cited 28 USC 2201.

6 They were silent on the Supreme Court

7 precedent of MedImmune which sets the case or

8 controversy standard for declaratory judgment.

9 They were silent on the second prong

10 of the redressability analysis with respect to

11 whether the Court has the authority to award

12 declaratory judgment.

13 They were silent on the likelihood of

14 partial redressability through declaratory judgment.

15 They were silent on the remedial

16 effect of a change in legal status of the parties if

17 declaratory judgment was ordered and how that would

18 impact the ongoing and worsening harm caused by the

19 Government's conduct.

20 They were silent, of course, as to any

21 new factual allegations in the Second Amended

22 Complaint as well as Plaintiffs' new request for

23 relief because that was not before them.

24 And of course they were silent on the

25 new Supreme Court precedent on Uzuegbunum v.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 25 of 67
Proceedings

26

1 Preczewski, which also was decided after their

2 opinion.

3 So the Ninth Circuit does not lay any

4 of those issues to rest. The Ninth Circuit never

5 said this Court cannot declare a constitutional

6 violation where there is an active case or

7 controversy with ongoing injury and causation. And

8 it would have been wrong had they said that, but

9 they didn't get to that issue.

10 So in a constitutional case of this

11 magnitude and of first impression, these issues of

12 declaratory judgment, partial redressability, and

13 the scope of relief that's proper must be thoroughly

14 and carefully resolved at a trial on standing and

15 the merits.

16 For all of these reasons, Your Honor,

17 the Second Amended Complaint should be accepted as

18 overcoming the final jurisdictional threshold of

19 properly pleading redressability. And if this Court

20 disagrees, Plaintiff respectfully requests an

21 opportunity to further plead redressability by

22 amendment.

23 And unless Your Honor has further

24 questions, I will wait and respond to any other

25 issues on rebuttal.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 26 of 67
Proceedings

27

1 THE COURT: I do have a question, and

2 I would like to jump to having you deal with it

3 head-on in your argument, and that is the late

4 filing by the Government on the analysis and the

5 implication of the Supreme Court case issued on June

6 17th, California v. Texas. And I -- you know, it's

7 a decision that was focused on the Affordable Care

8 Act, but may have implications in this case. And

9 I'm confident it will be argued strenuously by the

10 Government, but I would like to have your thoughts

11 on it at this point as I look at and listen to their

12 arguments.

13 MS. OLSON: Yes, Your Honor, I think

14 that the California v. Texas case is completely

15 irrelevant and off point to the issues before the

16 Court here. The reason is simple. In California v.

17 Texas, the Supreme Court found that there wasn't

18 injury and, because there wasn't going to be injury,

19 there couldn't be redressability.

20 So in that case the provision that

21 would have imposed fines on people who didn't have

22 insurance had already been decided by the Government

23 that it would not be enforced. So there was no

24 threat of the imposition of fines or harm in that

25 case, and that's why the Supreme Court said that

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 27 of 67
Proceedings

28

1 there is no redress that we can or should provide

2 here because there isn't injury in fact.

3 In contrast, of course, here the law

4 of the case is that Plaintiffs have adequately

5 established injury in fact and causation. And the

6 harms are ongoing. I mean, I think -- this has

7 really been a term of standing decisions. Just

8 today, Your Honor, another decision came down in the

9 TransUnion v. Ramirez case, which is also a standing

10 case. And there Justice Kavanaugh, writing for the

11 majority, says that for there to be a case or

12 controversy under Article III, the plaintiffs must

13 have a personal stake in the case and, to

14 demonstrate their personal stake, Plaintiffs must be

15 able to sufficiently answer the question, "What's

16 it to you?"

17 And that question -- "What's it to

18 you?" -- is very, very clear here. It's -- the

19 Government is acting as if these young people hold

20 no constitutional rights. They've said as much.

21 They also believe that their energy system policies

22 and practices are unreviewable and that it doesn't

23 matter if they continue burning fossil fuels

24 throughout the course of the century or not.

25 And that is a controversy between the

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 28 of 67
Proceedings

29

1 plaintiffs and their government that answers the

2 question, "What's it to you?"

3 And -- but I think the California v.

4 Texas case is not pertinent to this Court's

5 resolution of Plaintiffs' motion to amend, but the

6 TransUnion v. Ramirez case and possibly the Arthrex

7 case, which was also decided this week, may be

8 pertinent. And we intend to file a notice of

9 supplemental authority at least as to the TransUnion

10 case, Your Honor, which came out this morning.

11 THE COURT: Thank you. I try very

12 hard the mornings of expected opinions to be attuned

13 to them coming down, and I was getting ready for

14 this case and had an earlier hearing and did not

15 know that case came down. So I would have missed

16 just your eloquent summary of the argument and the

17 essence of the case, "What's it to you?" So I'm

18 very grateful I asked that question.

19 And you've got to have -- it's

20 interesting that all these cases have been basically

21 the body of the work of the Supreme Court in these

22 last few days.

23 Anything else you need to add? Thank

24 you. That was helpful to -- that late submission.

25 Anything else you need to add,

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 29 of 67
Proceedings

30

1 Ms. Olson, or are you finished and I can turn to the

2 Government? And I will come back to you for further

3 argument.

4 MS. OLSON: Yes, Your Honor. I'll

5 reserve time for after the Government argues. Thank

6 you.

7 THE COURT: You're welcome. For the

8 Government? Is it -- Mr. Duffy, are you going to

9 argue?

10 MR. DUFFY: Yes, that's right, Your

11 Honor.

12 THE COURT: Go right ahead.

13 MR. DUFFY: Good morning, and may it

14 please the Court, this is Sean Duffy with the United

15 States Department of Justice on behalf of the

16 defendants.

17 Your Honor, I'm going to go straight

18 to the bottom line issue before the Court today.

19 The Ninth Circuit has decided this case and ordered

20 that it be dismissed. The Ninth Circuit, en banc,

21 declined to reconsider that decision. There is no

22 standing. There is no jurisdiction. There is

23 nothing left for this Court to do but to dismiss the

24 case.

25 Plaintiffs disagree with the Ninth

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 30 of 67
Proceedings

31

1 Circuit decision. That is evident from their

2 briefs. The appropriate venue to raise that

3 disagreement, of course, is in the Supreme Court.

4 In the operative complaint, the

5 plaintiffs sought both declaratory and injunctive

6 relief. In the proposed amended complaint they seek

7 essentially the same relief.

8 Nothing has changed in this case. To

9 return to the trial court and litigate the same case

10 that the Ninth Circuit has ordered this Court to

11 dismiss as Plaintiffs propose is improper.

12 I'd like to begin with what we know

13 from the Ninth Circuit's decision because there are

14 at least a few inescapable takeaways worth noting.

15 First, we know declaratory relief

16 standing alone is not enough to satisfy the

17 redressability requirement for standing. And while

18 Plaintiffs have their reasons for disagreeing with

19 the Ninth Circuit's conclusion, that disagreement

20 isn't for this Court to resolve.

21 Second, we know an injunction also

22 won't suffice because the Ninth Circuit is skeptical

23 that even the incredibly broad injunction Plaintiffs

24 initially sought would not be substantially likely

25 to redress their injuries. It follows that the

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 31 of 67
Proceedings

32

1 vaguer injunction that they now seek falls even

2 shorter of satisfying redressability.

3 Plaintiffs' primary contention is that

4 they can amend the complaint to seek stand-alone

5 declaratory judgment on a constitutional issue.

6 They cannot do so.

7 Just last week in California v. Texas,

8 the Supreme Court reaffirmed the long-standing

9 principle that the Declaratory Judgment Act alone

10 does not provide a court with jurisdiction.

11 Instead, like every other type of remedy,

12 declaratory judgment actions must satisfy Article

13 III's case or controversy requirement.

14 The Plaintiffs referred to the

15 MedImmune decision. The Supreme Court in California

16 v. Texas relied on that decision as well for this

17 exact proposition. In California v. Texas the

18 plaintiffs sought a declaration that the minimal

19 coverage provision of the Affordable Care Act is

20 unconstitutional. But because the provision that

21 Plaintiffs challenged is not enforceable, they would

22 achieve no redress without a declaration -- or with

23 a declaration of it's constitutional.

24 The Supreme Court held that a

25 plaintiff did not have standing merely to obtain an

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 32 of 67
Proceedings

33

1 opinion that some government action is

2 unconstitutional. In other words, an Article III

3 court cannot declare constitutional rights in a

4 vacuum. There must be a redressable claim.

5 That holding applies here.

6 Plaintiffs' injuries will not be redressed merely if

7 the Court declares government action to be

8 unconstitutional. Here the Ninth Circuit found that

9 the claim for declaratory relief is not redressable

10 because a declaration on a constitutional ruling is

11 not likely to redress their injuries. The Ninth

12 Circuit concluded that the, quote, psychic

13 satisfaction of a declaration standing alone cannot

14 satisfy the redressability requirement.

15 And the Supreme Court decision in

16 California v. Texas affirms this principle.

17 THE COURT: So, Counsel, how do you --

18 you have to acknowledge that in the California case,

19 without a doubt -- and why every scholar who was

20 watching that case knew that the issue was that the

21 fine or fee had been eliminated and so it was really

22 rather a moot point to just simply make a

23 pronouncement about the Affordable Care Act. And

24 nobody could tie that together with the ability to

25 take those kids -- but this is very different

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 33 of 67
Proceedings

34

1 because the Ninth Circuit acknowledged that there

2 was harms to the plaintiffs in this instance and

3 that they had -- they had -- there was a link in

4 causation. And so it's postured very differently.

5 And then today -- and I haven't

6 obviously read the decision that just came down, but

7 I'm -- and I will, you know, immediately following

8 this hearing. But if Justice Kavanaugh is writing

9 that a case or controversy requires a personal stake

10 of "What's it to you," it seems me these 21 children

11 have certainly put that in the arena of controversy

12 and -- in their amendment, which would be their

13 first opportunity -- first amendment in this case to

14 put in -- an opportunity to address this declaratory

15 action and have the -- have, then, the opportunity

16 for the federal government to understand that courts

17 are going to protect a constitutional right, which I

18 think I wrote clearly about -- that is, the ability

19 to breathe, have clean water, have an energy source,

20 and be free from, let's say, for example in Oregon,

21 fires, wildfires, drought, inability to provide

22 resources for the community -- that they would have

23 a chance to have that right, declaratory judgment.

24 And then it would then empower the

25 government -- certainly a district court judge would

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 34 of 67
Proceedings

35

1 not be running the government -- but the government

2 to know that they have an obligation to address

3 policies that impinge on that constitutional right.

4 And that's, in essence, I think what

5 the Ninth Circuit case talked about in terms of

6 understanding the -- from their vantage point --

7 from their vantage point what was possible for a

8 court to do. Although I may disagree that the -- an

9 opportunity for a district court judge to oversee

10 and to help all three branches of government do a

11 better job of protecting the constitutional right to

12 breathe the air, have water, have resources

13 available, certainly that's contemplated in the way

14 in which our government was established. But that's

15 way down the road.

16 So I think -- you know, I'm happy to

17 hear further argument.

18 I also think that the Ninth Circuit

19 anticipated that if there could be a way to replead

20 this case, it was not foreclosed to this Court.

21 So anyway, I just think the new case

22 today -- I guess I'm thinking a little bit out loud.

23 The new case today -- "What's it to you?" -- these

24 young people have certainly thrown down that

25 question.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 35 of 67
Proceedings

36

1 And it seems like the Supreme Court

2 decisions in these two most recent cases give me

3 guidance as to what I need to do. So go ahead.

4 MR. DUFFY: Your Honor, I confess I

5 haven't read the decision that came down today, but

6 if Your Honor wants to have supplemental briefing on

7 that, we'll certainly do that.

8 THE COURT: Oh, I would like

9 supplemental briefing. And I will get the

10 transcript of this argument and do further research.

11 But -- so go right ahead. But it's

12 clear to me that there's -- this changes -- these

13 cases from the Supreme Court changed the complexion

14 of the case in significant ways.

15 And again, I believe even the Ninth

16 Circuit has given me some guidance. We're just

17 looking at what's the most appropriate. The

18 Government has a lot of latitude on how we should

19 proceed in this case.

20 So go right ahead. Continue your

21 argument.

22 MR. DUFFY: Okay. Well, I will

23 respond to your first point about the Court's

24 decision in California v. Texas. The plaintiffs

25 distinguish that case on the basis that their -- the

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 36 of 67
Proceedings

37

1 first prong of standing wasn't met in that case.

2 But the Supreme Court never sliced up the argument

3 that way. It looked -- it really just looked at

4 standing generally and determined that a declaratory

5 judgment standing alone without meeting the standing

6 requirements is impermissible.

7 Turning to the Ninth Circuit's

8 decision in this case, on the plaintiffs' request

9 for injunctive relief, the Ninth Circuit found at

10 least two reasons why Plaintiffs lack standing.

11 First, it expressed doubt that an injunction would

12 be substantially likely to redress Plaintiffs'

13 injuries. Based on Plaintiffs' own expert

14 testimony, injunctive relief is not likely to stop

15 climate change or ameliorate their injuries.

16 Second, the Court identified the

17 severe separation of powers concerns that this

18 lawsuit posts. It found the Plaintiffs' claims are

19 not redressable because the injunctive relief they

20 seek is not within the power of an Article III court

21 to grant.

22 The Ninth Circuit concluded that any

23 effective plan would necessarily require a host of

24 complex policy decisions entrusted to the wisdom and

25 discretion of the executive and legislative branches

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 37 of 67
Proceedings

38

1 and held that those decisions must be made by

2 elected representatives.

3 The proposed second complaint fairs no

4 better than the first one. In it Plaintiffs

5 fundamentally seek the same declaratory and

6 injunctive relief that they sought previously. With

7 regard to the declaratory relief, in both complaints

8 Plaintiffs seek a declaration that the energy system

9 violates their constitutional rights and the public

10 trust doctrine and a declaration that Section 201 of

11 the Energy Policy Act is unconstitutional.

12 The declaratory relief that Plaintiffs

13 seek is the same in both complaints.

14 With regard to the injunctive relief

15 in the proposed amended complaint, Plaintiffs seek

16 to enjoin Defendants from carrying out policies,

17 practices, and affirmative actions that harm them.

18 Both complaints seek essentially the

19 same injunctive relief, which is to have the Court

20 essentially commandeer the energy policy of the

21 United States. This is not a possible remedy, and

22 it raises severe separation of powers issues.

23 And it is noted that the Ninth Circuit

24 found that both of these forms of relief are not

25 redressable.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 38 of 67
Proceedings

39

1 Three important consequences flow --

2 THE COURT: I would -- excuse me. I

3 would disagree with that. I think what it does is

4 it gives direction to the Government to say when you

5 have choices and you have rights at stake and you

6 have a choice to use a source of energy that is

7 damaging or even a source that will sustain all the

8 abilities that the public may have to clean air,

9 clean water, resources -- you know, all that were

10 listed -- that their obligation is to choose the

11 source that will not damage.

12 I mean, I don't think it directs

13 anything. What it does is it gives guidance to the

14 federal government about, again, stepping up and

15 protecting the constitutional rights that have been

16 discussed.

17 So what is interesting in this case is

18 -- and what I think many people have not understood

19 -- is a district court is a place where the facts

20 are developed and the facts are laid out. And

21 perhaps you noted in my earlier decision, I

22 bifurcated. I bifurcated for a reason. I

23 bifurcated because if the facts and the trial on

24 those facts were out there, I strongly suspect -- it

25 goes right along with Ms. Olson's argument -- I

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 39 of 67
Proceedings

40

1 strongly suspect that -- when she says that the

2 federal government is likely to follow a court's

3 declaratory action, I strongly suspect if the

4 Government had those facts aired in open court, that

5 before the Court could even act there may be both

6 executive and legislative action that begins to

7 redress and address the damage done to the rights

8 that have been expressed by the 21 young people and

9 others.

10 So I think it's framing this in a way

11 in which trial courts are -- our best use is to

12 develop those facts. And then that's why I had a

13 second bifurcation and a place to -- how are those

14 redressed.

15 So, you know, this case is more

16 sophisticated than I think the Ninth Circuit

17 understood or that the Ninth Circuit understood what

18 a district court is capable of doing.

19 It's hard for me in this instance to

20 say otherwise, but so much work is done in

21 settlement discussions. That's why I often refer

22 everyone to settlement. In a settlement conference,

23 there's so much work that can come to the table when

24 people are interested in problem-solving and putting

25 mechanisms in place that allow people to address

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 40 of 67
Proceedings

41

1 these issues, because sometimes courts aren't the

2 best place.

3 But courts can be in a position where

4 they are, shall we say, backstopping the rights and

5 protecting those rights while solutions are reached

6 between and among the various parties who are both

7 in the case and not in the case.

8 So I hear you and the argument, but

9 I'm wanting you to think a little broader in terms

10 of -- not in such absolute terms, but to understand

11 why I think getting facts on the table all along in

12 this situation have been the goal of the Court and

13 important that these facts be developed on both

14 sides. Go ahead.

15 MR. DUFFY: Okay. I take your point,

16 Your Honor. But with respect to settlement, the

17 parties can explore settlement outside of the shadow

18 of this case.

19 THE COURT: Mr. Duffy, I am well aware

20 of that. And I know that -- I know that is a

21 parallel track. In most of my cases, it is a

22 parallel track because in so many ways I believe

23 settlement allows people to come to a resolution of

24 a case that -- where maybe nobody is particularly

25 perfectly satisfied, but they understand that there

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 41 of 67
Proceedings

42

1 is a problem to be addressed and they approach it in

2 a different fashion.

3 So, yes, I'm aware of that. But I'm

4 also trying to get you to focus on how this case,

5 moving forward with an amendment -- given what the

6 Supreme Court has said in the two most recent cases

7 and the way this case is postured, amending the

8 complaint is, frankly, not such a -- shall we say, a

9 controversial request on the part of the plaintiffs.

10 MR. DUFFY: Well, I disagree with Your

11 Honor's interpretation of what the Ninth Circuit has

12 ordered in this case. If the Ninth Circuit had any

13 inkling that the plaintiffs could file an amended

14 complaint on remand, I think there would have been

15 some language in that opinion to that effect, and I

16 see no language in the opinion to that effect.

17 THE COURT: Well, we're going to agree

18 to disagree on that point, because, let me tell you,

19 having been on the bench a long time, when they want

20 to dismiss with prejudice, they do that. I get

21 those opinions. When they don't, they leave it

22 open. And this was left open. I'm just saying.

23 MR. DUFFY: Okay. Well, with regard

24 -- you raise a couple of points going to the merits.

25 And let's not forget, the Ninth Circuit and the

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 42 of 67
Proceedings

43

1 Supreme Court understood that the striking breadth

2 of Plaintiffs' claims presents substantial grounds

3 for difference of opinion while at the same time

4 citing the standards for interlocutory appeal under

5 Section 1292(b). That observation wasn't only made

6 on standing. The Supreme Court clearly referred to

7 all aspects of the case.

8 So to the extent Plaintiffs insist

9 that an amendment is necessary to vindicate a clear

10 constitutional right, I just want to be clear that

11 the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court have not

12 accepted that view.

13 Even if Plaintiffs are ultimately

14 allowed to amend their complaint here, they will

15 ultimately have to contend with the faults in all

16 other aspects of their case, including the merits.

17 So we believe that three important

18 consequences flow ineluctably from the foregoing

19 analysis.

20 First, the Court must follow the Ninth

21 Circuit's mandate and dismiss the case. Dismissal

22 must be with prejudice, and the Court must deny the

23 motion to amend the complaint.

24 Under the rule of mandate, as Your

25 Honor's aware, a lower court is unquestionably

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 43 of 67
Proceedings

44

1 obligated to execute the terms of the mandate. And

2 the post-mandate conduct of the district court must

3 also be consistent with the spirit of the mandate.

4 The Ninth Circuit mandate is clear in this case.

5 They've instructed the Court to dismiss the case for

6 lack of Article III jurisdiction. That opinion

7 leaves no room for continuing this lawsuit based on

8 the minor amendments to the amended complaint.

9 Dismissal should be with prejudice.

10 Dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where a

11 complaint cannot be saved by an amendment. That's

12 the case here. Plaintiffs lack standing not merely

13 because of a pleading deficiency that could be

14 cured. That is clear from the proposed amended

15 complaint itself which does not in any way cure the

16 incurable standing deficiency that the Ninth Circuit

17 identified.

18 At bottom, the proposed amended

19 complaint -- in it there's no change -- there's no

20 allegation changing -- change in the government

21 action that was challenged. There's no change in

22 the types of harm the plaintiffs allege, and there's

23 no change in the declaratory relief the plaintiffs

24 seek. Indeed, Plaintiffs concede that they are not

25 bringing any new claims.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 44 of 67
Proceedings

45

1 So dismissal should be with prejudice

2 because any claim Plaintiffs intend to bring is no

3 different than the unsuccessful claims they already

4 brought.

5 And the motion to amend should be

6 denied as futile. Futility by itself is grounds for

7 denying an amendment. Here futility mandates denial

8 of the proposed amendment because the proposed

9 complaint seeks the same declaratory injunctive

10 remedies that the Ninth Circuit found failed to

11 establish redressability for purposes of standing.

12 In sum, both the rule of mandate and

13 the futility of amendment mandate the same result in

14 this case, dismissal with prejudice.

15 At root, Plaintiffs' request for

16 declaratory relief seeks a constitutional opinion

17 without a remedy. But Article III courts do not

18 decide theoretical inquiries; they decide cases.

19 And Plaintiffs' request for injunctive

20 relief seeks nothing more than a request that the

21 judiciary commandeer the executive branch and do so

22 at the expense of the legislative branch of

23 government. Our constitution crafted separated

24 powers that does not allow one branch of government

25 to commandeer another. Under our system of

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 45 of 67
Proceedings

46

1 government, the resolution of some critical issues

2 that are perceived as requiring judicial resolution

3 are not always amenable to a judicial resolution.

4 And that reality is no doubt frustrating to those

5 who hoped for the judicial process to accomplish

6 what the political process has not.

7 It was surely frustrating to the

8 states in Texas v. California who sought to end the

9 Affordable Care Act. But the constitutional

10 limitations on the powers of the courts and the

11 separations of powers principles within that

12 document preserved the process by which our

13 democracy functions.

14 We do not disrespect youth and the

15 important cause that they take up, but the place to

16 take up that cause is not the courtroom but instead

17 with their elected representative.

18 For all the foregoing reasons, the

19 Court should deny the motion to amend and it should

20 dismiss this case with prejudice as the Ninth

21 Circuit mandate requires.

22 If Your Honor has any further

23 questions, I'm happy to take those.

24 THE COURT: No, I'm fine. Thank you.

25 MR. DUFFY: Thank you, Your Honor.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 46 of 67
Proceedings

47

1 THE COURT: Ms. Olson, do you have

2 something more to add?

3 MS. OLSON: Yes, thank you. I just

4 have, I think, two or three quick points, Your

5 Honor.

6 I think it's incredible that six years

7 into this case where Plaintiffs have adequately

8 demonstrated they have ongoing and really

9 life-threatening injuries and they have demonstrated

10 with sufficient evidence that the Government is the

11 substantial cause of those injuries -- and those

12 findings or rulings of this Court below have been

13 affirmed by the Ninth Circuit -- but we are still

14 here arguing, six years later, over whether

15 Plaintiffs can get a declaratory judgment on their

16 constitutional rights.

17 It's -- I know of no other case that

18 would say that declaratory relief is not appropriate

19 and not required in this situation.

20 And the reason why it's so important

21 -- I want to emphasize this -- and it really ties

22 into what Mr. Duffy said. Mr. Duffy says that the

23 energy system is up to the political branches and

24 that these young people need to go convince their

25 elected officials or they need to go to the polls

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 47 of 67
Proceedings

48

1 and vote to change that system. And there's no

2 other instance where a constitutional right, a

3 fundamental right, is being violated that plaintiffs

4 are told to go to the polls.

5 So, for example, people who want to

6 protect their Second Amendment gun rights, they are

7 not told, "Go to the polls." They are granted

8 standing to come to the federal courts to have an

9 adjudication of their rights.

10 And every decision the Government has

11 made about the energy system today and for the past

12 50 years has been, to this point, solely up to the

13 political will of the majority and has not been

14 cavened by the constitution. And those policies and

15 practices, which Defendants admit are endangering

16 these Plaintiffs, have never been evaluated for

17 their constitutionality. But fundamental to our

18 constitutional democracy and its survival is these

19 young people's inalienable constitutional rights

20 that cannot be put up to a vote or the politics of

21 lobbyists.

22 They are protected. The founders

23 protected people and their rights from having to

24 just go to the polls to secure them and protect

25 them.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 48 of 67
Proceedings

49

1 And I think the Ninth Circuit case in

2 Ibrahim v. Department of Homeland Security at page

3 993 also brings this home. And it says a plaintiff

4 is not required to solve all roadblocks to full

5 realization of their rights at one time, that a

6 declaration of people's rights can remove one vital

7 roadblock to actually redressing harm that has been

8 caused.

9 So Plaintiffs clearly -- I just want

10 to state this clearly. We've said this for a long

11 time, but we do not ask the Court to commandeer the

12 nation's energy system. We want the Court here to

13 do its job -- to hear the evidence on both sides,

14 find the facts, declare the rights, and, if Your

15 Honor finds violations of those rights, to also

16 declare them.

17 And what Plaintiffs truly want is for

18 the political branches of government to stop

19 infringing their rights and to make policy decisions

20 that are protective of them.

21 And -- and then the last point, and

22 then I'll conclude, is that the defendants keep

23 saying that the nation's energy policy is dedicated

24 to their unfettered discretion. But they have never

25 once argued that the nation's energy system presents

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 49 of 67
Proceedings

50

1 a nonjusticiable political question for the nation's

2 energy policy. And they've never once said that the

3 climate crisis and the harms it's imposing on these

4 children are nonjusticiable because of the political

5 question doctrine. And that argument has done --

6 it's been decided. It's law of the case.

7 So as we head into over 110-degree

8 temperatures this early summer weekend in Eugene,

9 Oregon, and a summer again ravaged by drought, with

10 looming threats of another vicious wildfire season,

11 there's a new draft report by the United Nations

12 that just came out, and it says, quote, The worst is

13 yet to come affecting our children's and our

14 grandchildren's lives much more than our own.

15 Six years into this case these

16 plaintiffs are still being individually harmed by

17 their government's policies and practices, and only

18 a declaration by this Court of their constitutional

19 rights and the Government's violation thereof, after

20 all of the facts are laid bare, will truly begin to

21 protect their rights and redress their ongoing

22 injuries.

23 And with that, Your Honor, unless you

24 have further questions, I just have a couple of

25 housekeeping matters.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 50 of 67
Proceedings

51

1 THE COURT: Go ahead. I don't have

2 any other questions. Thank you.

3 MS. OLSON: Okay. So we will file the

4 notice of supplemental authority and respond on the

5 California v. Texas case and perhaps the Arthrex

6 case, which we need to read more carefully.

7 And we also are going to submit a new

8 Second Amended Complaint that corrects for all of

9 the individual defendants who have now been

10 appointed and confirmed to those defendant positions

11 as well as remove the organizational plaintiff,

12 Earth Guardians, as a named plaintiff in the Second

13 Amended Complaint since this case is moving forward

14 for the individual violations.

15 And we will also look at adding the

16 nominal damages request for relief.

17 THE COURT: Would you in your

18 supplement briefing obviously touch on the case that

19 came down today? I have fortunately had a law clerk

20 who has read it quickly and summarized it for me,

21 but I would essentially like you to talk about that

22 case as well in your supplement.

23 MS. OLSON: Absolutely, Your Honor.

24 We will do that.

25 THE COURT: All right. Thank you.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 51 of 67
Proceedings

52

1 MS. OLSON: Thank you very much.

2 THE COURT: Anything else for you,

3 Mr. Duffy?

4 MR. DUFFY: No. I just have one

5 comment, and that will be it.

6 It's not Mr. Duffy who said that the

7 energy system is up to the political branches. It's

8 the Ninth Circuit who said that definitively in its

9 opinion.

10 And insofar as Plaintiffs are saying

11 that a declaratory judgment would be enough to grant

12 some redressability here, there again, the Ninth

13 Circuit has spoken to that definitively. It said

14 no, and this Court is bound by that.

15 THE COURT: So, Mr. Duffy, I would

16 also tell you that the Government has the chance to

17 take a look -- and I will obviously pull the UN

18 report, the worst is yet to come, and I will read

19 that carefully -- that report carefully as well.

20 And I would think at this point the Government might

21 take a look at what -- what courts can do to be

22 helpful in this instance.

23 And I was hopeful that your argument

24 might have been different today. But I'm prepared

25 to go forward and make my decision in this case.

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 52 of 67
Proceedings

53

1 But I'm going to tell you honestly --

2 and I'm just putting this -- noting this for the

3 record. I'm not going to be able to get at this

4 immediately, and I'll tell you why. I have

5 emergency hearings on water cases in part of this

6 state. I have an emergency ESA case. I have TROs

7 that are in front of me. And you will have your

8 opinion as I get to it.

9 But the nature of the work is such

10 that as a district court judge in Oregon, I'm keenly

11 aware of some of the issues that were argued here

12 today. So I will get you an opinion when we -- I've

13 also asked for a transcript. I will look for the

14 supplemental briefing. But do not look for an

15 immediate ruling. I'm taking this under advisement.

16 I thank you for your time this

17 morning, and we're in recess. Thank you.

18 MS. OLSON: Thank you, Your Honor.

19 MR. DUFFY: Thank you, Your Honor.

20 (Conclusion of proceedings.)

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 53 of 67
Proceedings

54

1 State of Oregon )

 ) ss.

2 County of Lane )

3 

4 I, Eleanor G. Knapp, CSR-RPR, a Certified

5 Shorthand Reporter for the State of Oregon, certify

6 that the witness was sworn and the transcript is a

7 true record of the testimony given by the witness;

8 that at said time and place I reported all testimony

9 and other oral proceedings had in the foregoing

10 matter; that the foregoing transcript consisting of

11 53 pages contains a full, true and correct

12 transcript of said proceedings reported by me to the

13 best of my ability on said date.

14 If any of the parties or the witness requested

15 review of the transcript at the time of the

16 proceedings, such correction pages are attached.

17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand this 28th

18 day of June 2021, in the City of Eugene, County of

19 Lane, State of Oregon.

20 

21 

 

22 Eleanor G. Knapp, CSR-RPR

23 CSR No. 93-0262

24 Expires: September 30, 2023

25 

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 54 of 67
Proceedings

1

110degree 50:7

1292b 43:5

14yearold 4:20

15a 9:13 10:3

18:21

17th 27:6

276a 16:17

28th 54:17

615cv01517aa

1:7

95a 16:16

95b 16:16

abate 23:7

abide 17:4,7

abilities 39:8

ability 3:11 22:6

33:24 34:18 54:13

(5)

able 3:18 28:15

53:3

absolute 41:10

absolutely 51:23

abundance 21:19

abundant 22:11

accepted 16:20

26:17 43:12

access 8:24

accomplish 46:5

achieve 32:22

acknowledge

33:18

acknowledged

34:1

across 4:22

act 8:23 20:3,6

22:10 23:24 25:5

27:8 32:9,19

33:23 38:11 40:5

46:9 (13)

acted 20:24

acting 28:19

action 33:1,7

34:15 40:3,6

44:21 (6)

actions 32:12

38:17

active 26:6

actively 8:9

acts 20:20,25

add 29:23,25

47:2

adding 51:15

addition 16:18

22:9

additional 3:4

address 11:16

13:9 14:13 15:15

18:25 22:13 24:19

34:14 35:2

40:7,25 (11)

addressed 18:2

42:1

addressing 18:5

adequately 28:4

47:7

adjudicated 7:17

adjudication

6:13 48:9

admit 48:15

adults 3:22 7:11

advisement

53:15

affecting 6:4

50:13

affects 7:22

affirmative 38:17

affirmed 47:13

affirms 33:16

affordable 27:7

32:19 33:23 46:9

(4)

afresh 18:16

against 8:19 9:8

agree 11:3 42:17

agreement 11:6

ahead 3:5 4:17

22:2 30:12

36:3,11,20 41:14

51:1 (9)

aiken 1:13

aired 40:4

al 1:5,9 2:5,6 (4)

alabama 5:14

allegation 44:20

allegations

14:22,24 15:23

22:15 23:4 24:3,6

25:21 (8)

allege 16:2 17:2,6

24:4 44:22 (5)

alleged 7:14,25

allow 7:13 8:23

40:25 45:24 (4)

allowed 43:14

allowing 17:14

18:19

allows 9:5 41:23

alone 9:2 31:16

32:9 33:13 37:5

(5)

altered 16:10,12

alternative 21:21

although 35:8

ambiguity 23:22

ameliorate 37:15

amenable 46:3

amend 3:4 8:11

9:17 18:7 21:6

22:7 24:21 29:5

32:4 43:14,23

45:5 46:19 (13)

amended 6:12,17

9:19,22 10:16,22

11:13,19 13:15

14:8,19,21

15:20,21,25

16:1,3,16 17:14

18:20 19:1

22:1,15 24:3

25:21 26:17 31:6

38:15 42:13

44:8,14,18 51:8,13

(34)

amending 15:12

42:7

amendment 4:22

5:11 6:1,18,18,22

8:19 10:2,7,19

14:13 15:15 18:9

21:2 25:3 26:22

34:12,13 42:5

43:9 44:11

45:7,8,13 48:6

(25)

amendments

9:24 44:8

america 1:8 2:6

among 41:6

analysis 9:14

11:16,24 12:19

18:22 20:13 21:19

25:10 27:4 43:19

(10)

analyze 13:8

analyzed 14:7

andor 21:21

andrea 1:21 2:15

ann 1:13

anticipated 35:19

anyway 22:2

35:21

apologize 4:9,16

15:8 19:14 (4)

appeal 9:11

11:20 12:5 13:3

23:14 43:4 (6)

appearances

1:18

appellate 11:8

18:10

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 55 of 67
Proceedings

2

applied 15:20

applies 33:5

apply 15:25

appointed 51:10

approach 42:1

appropriate

21:10,11 31:2

36:17 44:10 47:18

(6)

ar15 7:6

arena 34:11

argue 6:11 20:3

22:17 24:21 30:9

(5)

argued 13:3

19:10 27:9 49:25

53:11 (5)

argues 30:5

arguing 47:14

argument 1:12

2:6 3:4 13:6

15:3,7 19:12 22:3

27:3 29:16 30:3

35:17 36:10,21

37:2 39:25 41:8

50:5 52:23 (19)

arguments 12:16

27:12

arrived 13:13

arthrex 29:6 51:5

article 8:22

13:11,25 14:3

17:22 19:2 20:19

22:11 23:23 28:12

32:12 33:2 37:20

44:6 45:17 (15)

aspect 24:19

aspects 43:7,16

assault 7:6,11 8:1

assemble 3:23

assert 7:14

associates 11:10

attached 54:16

attuned 29:12

authority 25:11

29:9 51:4

automatically

15:25

autonomy 7:1

available 9:3,7

20:7 35:13 (4)

award 10:18 22:6

25:11

awarded 11:4

19:4,19,22 (4)

awards 22:24

backed 24:5

backstopping

41:4

bad 9:25

banc 30:20

banned 5:18

banning 7:11

bare 50:20

barnette 5:5

barred 8:20

17:13

barring 17:15

basically 29:20

behalf

2:10,12,15,18,20

3:8 30:15 (7)

behave 3:23

bench 42:19

best 40:11 41:2

54:13

better 35:11 38:4

beyond 14:2

22:18

bifurcated

39:22,22,23

bifurcation 40:13

biological 22:21

bit 15:4 35:22

bl 4:7

blanket 24:18

board 5:5 16:12

23:16

body 29:21

bonta 7:9

bottom 30:18

44:18

bound 52:14

branch

45:21,22,24

branches 35:10

37:25 47:23 49:18

52:7 (5)

breadth 43:1

breathe 34:19

35:12

brief 13:2,7 19:6

24:8 (4)

briefed 14:7

briefing 9:14

36:6,9 51:18

53:14 (5)

briefs 31:2

bring 17:8 45:2

bringing 44:25

brings 11:15 49:3

broad 31:23

broader 41:9

brought 45:4

brown 16:12

23:16

burden 18:22,23

19:3,20 22:13

23:8 (6)

burning 28:23

california 7:10

27:6,14,16 29:3

32:7,15,17

33:16,18 36:24

46:8 51:5 (13)

callin 3:9

cannot 3:12 5:13

18:8 20:4 26:5

32:6 33:3,13

44:11 48:20 (10)

capable 40:18

capital 10:8

care 27:7 32:19

33:23 46:9 (4)

carefully 26:14

51:6 52:19,19 (4)

carrying 23:2

38:16

cascadia 1:4

case 2:5 4:24

8:16 9:9 10:8,13

11:1,9 12:1,4,17

13:17 14:6 15:6

16:13,20

19:6,7,8,20,23,25

20:1,14,15,16

21:8,17,22,25

22:21 23:13 24:13

25:7 26:6,10

27:5,8,14,20,25

28:4,9,10,11,13 29

:4,6,7,10,14,15,17

30:19,24 31:8,9

32:13 33:18,20

34:9,13

35:5,20,21,23

36:14,19,25 37:1,8

39:17 40:15

41:7,7,18,24

42:4,7,12

43:7,16,21

44:4,5,12 45:14

46:20 47:7,17

49:1 50:6,15

51:5,6,13,18,22

52:25 53:6 (100)

cases 10:4 11:23

22:12 24:2,8

29:20 36:2,13

41:21 42:6 45:18

53:5 (12)

cathy 2:23

caught 15:8

causation 9:9

13:25 20:11,16,17

26:7 28:5 34:4 (8)

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 56 of 67
Proceedings

3

cause 7:16 17:6,9

46:15,16 47:11 (6)

caused 16:24

25:18 49:8

causing 21:13

cavened 48:14

center 22:20

central 12:24

17:18,21,25 (4)

century 28:24

centuryold 8:22

certified 54:4

certify 54:5

challenge 7:15

challenged 32:21

44:21

chance 34:23

52:16

change 9:3 16:6

22:23 25:16 37:15

44:19,20,21,23

48:1 (10)

changed

18:15,18 31:8

36:13 (4)

changes 7:21

9:11 21:17 36:12

(4)

changing 44:20

cheerleader 4:20

children 3:21

4:2,22 5:6,13,15,1

9,19,22,25 6:4,10

7:11 8:23

16:12,14 23:19

34:10 50:4 (19)

children's 50:13

choice 39:6

choices 39:5

choose 39:10

circuit 8:13

9:11,19,23

10:8,11,14,21

11:5,9,17

12:13,15,18,21,25

13:8,19,21

14:12,17 15:14

17:13,15,17 18:3,4

22:20 23:22

24:7,10,15,17,22

25:1,2 26:3,4

30:19,20

31:1,10,22 33:8,12

34:1 35:5,18

36:16 37:9,22

38:23 40:16,17

42:11,12,25 43:11

44:4,16 45:10

46:21 47:13 49:1

52:8,13 (66)

circuit's 11:21

13:14 15:19

31:13,19 37:7

43:21 (7)

circumstances

18:15,18

cited 24:8 25:5

citing 43:4

civil 2:5 10:3

claim 33:4,9 45:2

claims 8:19 37:18

43:2 44:25 45:3

(5)

clarification 6:3

clarified 5:23

clean 34:19

39:8,9

clear 18:8 20:23

22:10,17 24:9,14

28:18 36:12

43:9,10 44:4,14

(12)

clearly 20:15

34:18 43:6

49:9,10 (5)

clerk 2:4,24

51:19

climate 7:1 37:15

50:3

college 4:21

columbia 5:18

combination

18:19

commandeer

38:20 45:21,25

49:11 (4)

comment 52:5

common 20:23

community

34:22

complaint

6:12,17 8:11,17

9:19,22 10:16,22

11:13,19 13:15

14:9,19,21

15:13,21,22,25

16:1,3,16 17:14

18:8,20 19:2

21:7,21 22:1,8,16

25:22 26:17

31:4,6 32:4

38:3,15 42:8,14

43:14,23

44:8,11,15,19 45:9

51:8,13 (48)

complaints 11:25

38:7,13,18 (4)

completely 27:14

complex 37:24

complexion

21:17 36:13

compliance 17:9

comply 10:2 24:4

concede 44:24

concerns 37:17

conclude 49:22

concluded 33:12

37:22

conclusion 31:19

53:20

conclusively 13:9

conduct 25:19

44:2

conference 4:12

40:22

confess 36:4

confident 27:9

confined 3:19

confirmed 51:10

congress 8:23

consequences

5:21 6:3 39:1

43:18 (4)

consider 24:23

consistent 23:23

44:3

consistently 11:6

23:11

consisting 54:10

constitution

45:23 48:14

constitutional

4:6,19 5:1,2,17

6:2,7,8 7:19,25

8:7,25 16:7,8

17:8,10 19:20

20:16 21:13

23:1,5,12 26:5,10

28:20 32:5,23

33:3,10 34:17

35:3,11 38:9

39:15 43:10 45:16

46:9 47:16

48:2,18,19 50:18

(42)

constitutionality

48:17

constitutionally

4:25 6:14

contains 54:11

contemplated

35:13

contend 22:22

43:15

contention 32:3

contest 23:3

continue 28:23

36:20

continues 16:22

continuing 17:1

44:7

contrary 8:22

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 57 of 67
Proceedings

4

contrast 28:3

controversial

42:9

controversy 9:10

16:8 19:8 20:1,10

21:9 23:13 25:8

26:7 28:12,25

32:13 34:9,11 (14)

convicted 5:12

6:4

convince 47:24

correction 54:16

corrects 23:5

51:8

counsel 33:17

county 54:2,18

couple 42:24

50:24

course 12:7,10

15:10 23:10 24:11

25:20,24 28:3,24

31:3 (10)

court 1:1 2:21

3:1,7,10,16

4:5,6,8,13

5:6,8,11,15,23

9:7,15,18,21 10:13

11:8,12 12:1,6,9

13:13,18,22,24

14:3,15,20

15:1,16,24 16:4 17

:7,11,13,15,18,21,

22 18:1,6,9,12,14

19:7,11,16,25

21:1,16,17,22,24

22:6,12,24

23:17,24

24:7,14,18

25:6,11,25 26:5,19

27:1,5,16,17,25

29:11,21

30:7,12,14,18,23

31:3,9,10,20

32:8,10,15,24

33:3,7,15,17 34:25

35:8,9,20

36:1,8,13

37:2,16,20 38:19

39:2,19 40:4,5,18

41:12,19 42:6,17

43:1,6,11,20,22,25

44:2,5 46:19,24

47:1,12 49:11,12

50:18 51:1,17,25

52:2,14,15 53:10

(136)

court's 3:15 9:12

12:13 14:18 15:17

17:4 20:23

24:5,19 29:4

36:23 40:2 (12)

courthouse 3:13

8:2

courtordered

12:22

courtroom 46:16

courts 5:1 6:6,9

7:13 10:25 11:5,6

12:23 24:1 34:16

40:11 41:1,3

45:17 46:10 48:8

52:21 (17)

coverage 32:19

crafted 45:23

crimes 5:12

crisis 50:3

critical 46:1

crucial 13:17

cruel 6:19

csr 54:23

csrrpr 54:4,22

cure 10:19 14:11

44:15

cured 44:14

current 9:3

cut 15:3 19:11,12

damage 20:18

21:11 39:11 40:7

(4)

damages 20:24

21:4,6 22:7 51:16

(5)

damaging 39:7

danger 6:25

date 54:13

deal 27:2

death 5:13

decide 15:17

24:14 45:18,18 (4)

decided 20:14

26:1 27:22 29:7

30:19 50:6 (6)

decision 14:18

27:7 28:8 30:21

31:1,13 32:15,16

33:15 34:6

36:5,24 37:8

39:21 48:10 52:25

(16)

decisions 12:12

28:7 36:2 37:24

38:1 49:19 (6)

declaration

4:6,19 5:17,20 6:2

7:18 8:3,7,24 9:2

20:8 22:25 23:1

32:18,22,23

33:10,13 38:8,10

49:6 50:18 (22)

declaratory 6:8

9:5,7 13:4,5,9

17:4,16 18:2,24,25

19:3,9,10,19,21 20

:2,2,3,6,21,24,25

21:3,9 22:10,18

23:12,24 24:11

25:4,8,12,14,17

26:12 31:5,15

32:5,9,12 33:9

34:14,23 37:4

38:5,7,12 40:3

44:23 45:9,16

47:15,18 52:11

(55)

declare 5:1 6:6

26:5 33:3

49:14,16 (6)

declared 4:1

5:8,13 7:10 17:3

(5)

declares 16:4

33:7

declaring 23:19

declined 30:21

decree 17:7

dedicated 49:23

deeply 7:4

defect 8:12

defendant 51:10

defendants

1:10,22 2:18

10:1,18 12:20

14:16 17:3,7,11

18:3,24 19:6

20:3,12 22:13

23:9 30:16 38:16

48:15 49:22 51:9

(22)

defendants' 12:2

18:22,23 19:20 (4)

deficiency 10:20

14:11 44:13,16 (4)

define 5:2 6:7

definitively

52:8,13

delay 9:25

democracy 46:13

48:18

demonstrate

28:14

demonstrated

9:9 47:8,9

denial 45:7

denials 12:14

denied 3:25 18:7

45:6

deny 43:22 46:19

denying 45:7

department

30:15 49:2

deprivation 6:16

deprives 5:25

design 14:3

determined 37:4

develop 17:24

40:12

developed 39:20

41:13

dictates 13:13

difference 43:3

differently 34:4

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 58 of 67
Proceedings

5

difficult 4:11,14

dignity 7:23

direction 21:24

39:4

directions 11:12

directs 39:12

disagree 11:2

30:25 35:8 39:3

42:10,18 (6)

disagreeing

31:18

disagreement

31:3,19

disagrees 26:20

discretion 14:14

15:18 18:15 37:25

49:24 (5)

discussed 39:16

discussions 40:21

dismiss 10:13,21

11:8,12 12:2,4

30:23 31:11 42:20

43:21 44:5 46:20

(12)

dismissal 10:11

14:8 15:19,24

24:17,18 43:21

44:9,10 45:1,14

(11)

dismissed 9:19

10:16 11:25 12:17

30:20 (5)

disputed 12:8

disrespect 46:14

distinguish 36:25

district 1:1,2 4:7

5:18 7:9 12:1

13:22,24 16:13

18:9 34:25 35:9

39:19 40:18 44:2

53:10 (16)

diversity 22:21

doctrine 8:21

38:10 50:5

document 46:12

dollar 20:18,20

doors 8:2

doubt 22:18

33:19 37:11 46:4

(4)

draft 50:11

drought 34:21

50:9

duffy 1:22

2:17,18

30:8,10,13,14

36:4,22 41:15,19

42:10,23 46:25

47:22,22

52:3,4,6,15 53:19

(21)

earth 51:12

education 5:5

16:12 23:16,20 (4)

effect 25:16

42:15,16

effective 37:23

eight 4:4

eighth 5:11

6:1,18

either 5:18

eldest 6:20

eleanor 1:25

54:4,22

elected 38:2

46:17 47:25

eliminated 33:21

eloquent 29:16

emergency

53:5,6

eminence 10:8

emissions 17:25

emphasize 47:21

empower 34:24

en 30:20

endangering

48:15

endure 3:25

energy 8:18

16:4,25 17:8

21:12 22:23 28:21

34:19 38:8,11,20

39:6 47:23 48:11

49:12,23,25 50:2

52:7 (19)

enforceable

32:21

enforced 27:23

enjoin 38:16

entire 6:5

entirely 19:24

entitled 6:11

entrusted 37:24

equal 7:2 23:19

equivalent 20:24

esa 53:6

essence 29:17

35:4

essentially 31:7

38:18,20 51:21 (4)

establish 45:11

established 28:5

35:14

et 1:5,9 2:5,6 (4)

eu 24:8

evaluated 48:16

evan 5:21,24

evans 24:7

evidence 47:10

49:13

evident 31:1

exact 32:17

example 19:24

34:20 48:5

excuse 39:2

execute 44:1

executive 37:25

40:6 45:21

exercising 5:7

exist 20:18

existed 20:25

expect 2:22

expected 29:12

expense 45:22

experience 16:24

expert 37:13

expires 54:24

explain 20:5

explained 18:7

explicit 14:6

explicitly 17:18

explore 41:17

expressed 37:11

40:8

expression 5:8

expressly 22:8

extent 17:5 43:8

f3d 11:10

face 3:25 10:21

factors 18:19

factual 14:22

15:23 16:18 22:14

23:4 24:3,6 25:21

(8)

failed 45:10

fairs 38:3

faith 9:25

falls 32:1

family 6:25

fashion 42:2

faults 43:15

favor 10:6 11:4

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 59 of 67
Proceedings

6

federal 7:9,13

10:3 16:22 34:16

39:14 40:2 48:8

(8)

fee 33:21

fifth 6:21 8:19

file 6:12 29:8

42:13 51:3 (4)

filing 27:4

final 5:3 12:5

26:18

finally 5:12

findings 12:6

47:12

fine 33:21 46:24

fines 27:21,24

finished 15:5

30:1

fires 34:21

five 3:14

fleck 11:9

flow 39:1 43:18

focus 42:4

focused 12:19

18:5 27:7

follow 40:2 43:20

follows 31:25

foreclosed 35:20

foregoing 43:18

46:18 54:9,10 (4)

forever 16:10

forget 42:25

forms 38:24

forth 19:1

fortunately 51:19

forward 42:5

51:13 52:25

fossil 17:24 28:23

founders 48:22

framing 40:10

frank 1:23 2:20

frankly 42:8

free 4:2 5:7 6:24

16:14 34:20 (5)

freedom 5:7 6:23

freely 10:4

friday 1:14 2:2

front 53:7

frustrating

46:4,7

fuel 17:25

fuels 28:23

full 49:4 54:11

fully 14:7 15:17

20:12

function 3:24

functions 46:13

fundamental 6:1

7:5,14 48:3,17 (5)

fundamentally

38:5

futile 9:23 14:13

15:13 25:3 45:6

(5)

futility

11:15,17,24 13:16

15:15 22:14 23:9

45:6,7,13 (10)

future 21:19

gather 3:12

goal 41:12

governing 9:24

government

4:1,23 6:15

7:16,19,22 8:8,8

9:1,10 10:7

11:2,24 12:3,11,16

16:6,11,22 17:24

20:9 21:9,12,14

22:22 23:4 24:4

27:4,10,22 28:19

29:1 30:2,5,8

33:1,7 34:16,25

35:1,1,10,14 36:18

39:4,14 40:2,4

44:20 45:23,24

46:1 47:10 48:10

49:18 52:16,20

(57)

government's

13:2 23:1 25:19

50:17,19 (5)

governmentimpo

sed 6:25

grandchildren's

50:14

grant 9:16 37:21

52:11

granted 10:2

48:7

grapple 19:5,22

20:13

grappling 22:9

grateful 29:18

gregory 1:20

2:11,12

grounds 43:2

45:6

guardians 51:12

guess 35:22

guidance 36:3,16

39:13

gun 48:6

hampton 18:6,13

happiness 6:23

happy 3:4 35:16

46:23

harm 16:23 17:6

23:6 25:18 27:24

38:17 44:22 49:7

(8)

harmed 50:16

harms 28:6 34:2

50:3

headon 27:3

health 16:23

hear 3:4 4:11,12

24:2 35:17 41:8

49:13 (7)

hearing 29:14

34:8

hearings 19:17

53:5

held 22:20 32:24

38:1

helpful 29:24

52:22

history 7:4

hold 3:24 9:21

28:19

holding 15:5 33:5

holdings 13:20

homeland 49:2

honestly 53:1

honor

2:9,12,15,17,19

3:6,10,20,21 7:24

9:14 12:1 15:11

17:17 19:10,15

21:5 22:4 24:12

26:16,23 27:13

28:8 29:10

30:4,11,17 36:4,6

41:16 46:22,25

47:5 49:15 50:23

51:23 53:18,19

(38)

honor's 42:11

43:25

honorable 1:13

hoped 46:5

hopeful 52:23

host 37:23

housekeeping

50:25

human 7:2

ibrahim 49:2

identified 37:16

44:17

ignore 17:17

19:7,24 21:23

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 60 of 67
Proceedings

7

23:11 (5)

ignored 23:13

iii 8:22 13:11,25

14:3 17:22 19:2

20:19 22:11 23:23

28:12 33:2 37:20

44:6 45:17 (14)

iii's 32:13

immediate 53:15

immediately 34:7

53:4

immensely 6:9

impact 25:18

impermissible

37:6

impinge 35:3

implement 14:4

implication 27:5

implications 8:14

27:8

implied 17:12

imposed 27:21

imposing 50:3

imposition 27:24

impression 26:11

improper 31:11

inability 34:21

inalienable 48:19

inappropriate

11:7

includes 22:6

including 43:16

incredible 47:6

incredibly 31:23

incurable 44:16

indeed 44:24

individual

51:9,14

individually

50:16

ineluctably 43:18

inescapable

31:14

infringed 9:1

infringing 49:19

initially 31:24

injunction

31:21,23 32:1

37:11 (4)

injunctive 12:25

18:1 24:12 31:5

37:9,14,19

38:6,14,19 45:9,19

(12)

injured 16:19,21

injuries 7:15,16

17:10 22:19 31:25

33:6,11 37:13,15

47:9,11 50:22 (12)

injury 9:9 13:23

20:10,15,17 26:7

27:18,18 28:2,5

(10)

injustice 18:12

inkling 42:13

inquiries 45:18

insist 43:8

insofar 52:10

instance 34:2

40:19 48:2 52:22

(4)

instead 10:20

32:11 46:16

instructed 44:5

insurance 27:22

integrated 23:20

intend 29:8 45:2

intends 10:13

interested 40:24

interesting 29:20

39:17

interests 4:23

interlocutory

9:11,23 11:20

12:5 13:3 14:12

15:14 17:12,20

23:14,22 43:4 (12)

interpret 13:14

interpretation

23:21 42:11

interpreting

23:25

interrupt 4:8

21:1

interrupting 4:17

intervening

21:16

introduce 2:7

invade 4:25

invaded 6:15

invasion 6:16

invoked 5:11

irrelevant 27:15

issue 8:3 9:7

10:10 14:10

17:18,21,25 18:2,4

19:23 24:15 26:9

30:18 32:5 33:20

(15)

issued 4:6 11:11

27:5

issues 9:15 12:8

15:5 26:4,11,25

27:15 38:22 41:1

46:1 53:11 (11)

issuing 17:15

job 35:11 49:13

judge 2:25 6:6

7:9 34:25 35:9

53:10 (6)

judgment 5:3

9:5,7 10:5,17,18

11:4 12:5 13:10

14:1 17:5,16

18:2,24

19:1,4,9,19,21

20:2,2,4,6,25,25

21:10 22:10,18

23:12,24

25:5,8,12,14,17

26:12 32:5,9,12

34:23 37:5 47:15

52:11 (43)

judgments 6:9

judicial 46:2,3,5

judiciary 8:24

45:21

julia 1:19 2:10

3:8

juliana 1:4 2:5

jump 27:2

juncture 13:18

june 1:15 2:1

27:5 54:18 (4)

jurisdiction

10:23 11:2 12:23

30:22 32:10 44:6

(6)

jurisdictional

26:18

justice 8:14

28:10 30:15 34:8

(4)

justices 4:5

justify 18:19

kavanaugh 28:10

34:8

keenly 53:10

kelsey 1:4 6:19

key 12:18

kids 33:25

knapp 1:25

54:4,22

lack 10:22 11:1,8

37:10 44:6,12 (6)

lacked 10:24

laid 39:20 50:20

lane 54:2,19

language 18:10

20:5 42:15,16 (4)

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 61 of 67
Proceedings

8

latitude 36:18

law 4:7 5:17 7:3

8:16 9:12,24

13:16 14:6 15:6

16:20

18:14,17,24,25

19:6,23 20:23

22:10 23:17,25

24:6 28:3 50:6

51:19 (24)

lawsuit 37:18

44:7

lay 24:16 26:3

learn 3:23

least 7:4 13:5

29:9 31:14 37:10

(5)

leave 18:7 42:21

leaves 44:7

legal 7:21 9:4

16:9,11 25:16 (5)

legally 10:15

legislative 37:25

40:6 45:22

less 6:22

levi 6:20

liberally 10:4

liberty 7:5

lifethreatening

47:9

likelihood 25:13

limitations 46:10

limited 24:20

limits 3:17 7:19

8:8

link 34:3

listed 39:10

listen 3:12 27:11

litigate 31:9

litigation 12:10

23:10

lobbyists 48:21

located 6:21

longstanding

32:8

looming 50:10

loud 35:22

love 3:22

lower 24:1 43:25

magnitude 26:11

mahoney 4:7,19

16:13

majority 28:11

48:13

mandate 11:11

18:10 24:13

43:21,24 44:1,3,4

45:12,13 46:21

(11)

mandates 45:7

manifest 18:12

manifestly 8:21

material 12:8

materials 3:2

matter 6:9 8:17

10:22 28:23 54:10

(5)

matters 50:25

maybe 41:24

meaningful 17:5

mechanisms

40:25

medimmune

19:7,25 25:7

32:15 (4)

meet 22:13 23:8

meeting 37:5

mental 16:23

merely 32:25

33:6 44:12

meritorious 10:4

merits 10:5,17

11:1,3 26:15

42:24 43:16 (7)

met 13:23 37:1

miller

5:14,17,22,24 7:8

(5)

minimal 32:18

minor 44:8

minutes 3:15

missed 29:15

moment 13:13

month 7:8

monumental

8:14

moot 33:22

morning

2:9,11,14,17,19

3:7 29:10 30:13

53:17 (9)

mornings 29:12

motion 3:3

8:11,13 9:16

12:2,3 24:21 29:5

43:23 45:5 46:19

(11)

motions 12:14

21:20

move 3:22 10:4

moving 42:5

51:13

mute 4:10,14

nation 7:5

nation's 3:21

8:18 16:4

49:12,23,25 50:1

(7)

national 16:25

nations 50:11

nature 19:16

53:9

necessarily 37:23

necessary 43:9

ninth 8:12

9:11,19,23

10:8,11,14,20

11:9,17,21

12:13,14,18,20,25

13:8,14,19,21

14:11,17 15:14,19

17:13,14,16 18:3,4

22:20 23:22

24:7,10,15,17,22

25:1,2 26:3,4

30:19,20,25

31:10,13,19,22

33:8,11 34:1

35:5,18 36:15

37:7,9,22 38:23

40:16,17

42:11,12,25

43:11,20 44:4,16

45:10 46:20 47:13

49:1 52:8,12 (72)

nobody 33:24

41:24

nominal 20:18,23

21:4,6,10 22:6

51:16 (7)

nonjusticiable

50:1,4

noted 38:23

39:21

notice 29:8 51:4

noting 31:14 53:2

number 2:5

obligated 44:1

obligation 9:12

35:2 39:10

obligations 24:1

observation 43:5

obtain 13:4 32:25

obtaining 19:9

20:1

obviously 34:6

51:18 52:17

officials 47:25

olson 1:19 2:9,10

3:3,6,8,20 4:16,18

15:1,10 19:14,18

21:5 22:4 27:13

30:1,4 47:1,3

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 62 of 67
Proceedings

9

51:3,23 52:1

53:18 (24)

olson's 39:25

ongoing 17:1

21:8 23:6 25:18

26:7 28:6 47:8

50:21 (8)

open 14:14 15:16

40:4 42:22,22 (5)

opening 13:2,7

operative 31:4

opinion 9:24

11:17,21,22 13:21

14:12,17,18 15:15

17:12,17,20 18:13

23:22 24:10 26:2

33:1 42:15,16

43:3 44:6 45:16

52:9 53:8,12 (25)

opinions 29:12

42:21

opportunity

26:21 34:13,14,15

35:9 (5)

oral 1:12 2:6 54:9

order 7:15 9:16

10:2 14:3

15:19,24 17:23

24:5,20 (9)

ordered 25:17

30:19 31:10 42:12

(4)

ordinary 12:10

oregon 1:2 34:20

50:9 53:10

54:1,5,19 (7)

organizational

51:11

outcome 8:13

outside 12:22

41:17

overcoming

26:18

oversee 35:9

paragraph

16:17,17 22:5

paragraphs

16:15,18

parallel 41:21,22

parole 5:16,19,24

partial 13:6

25:14 26:12

particularly

18:11 41:24

parties 9:15

20:10 25:16

41:6,17 54:14 (6)

past 48:11

pasted 14:17

people's 48:19

49:6

perceived 8:12

46:2

perfectly 41:25

perhaps 21:19

39:21 51:5

period 3:19

permission 3:15

permitted 5:25

10:25

personal 6:24 8:5

28:13,14 34:9 (5)

pertinent 19:6,23

29:4,8 (4)

phase 17:24

philip 1:20 2:12

phone 4:10,12,15

physical 7:23

16:23

plain 9:4 20:5

plaintiff 26:20

32:25 49:3

51:11,12 (5)

plaintiffs 1:6,19

2:8,10,13,16

3:8,11 9:8 10:23

12:2,24 13:1,4,18

14:11 16:2,9,19,21

17:2,6,23 20:7

23:7 28:4,12,14

29:1 30:25

31:5,11,18,23

32:14,18,21 34:2

36:24 37:10

38:4,8,12,15

42:9,13 43:8,13

44:12,22,23,24

45:2 47:7,15

48:3,16 49:9,17

50:16 52:10 (61)

plaintiffs'

8:17,19 9:16 10:1

11:13,25 12:21

13:11 14:4,20

15:20 17:10 19:1

22:19 25:22 29:5

32:3 33:6

37:8,12,13,18 43:2

45:15,19 (25)

plan 12:22 14:5

17:24 37:23 (4)

plead 26:21

pleading 26:19

44:13

please 2:7 3:7

4:14,17 30:14 (5)

point 19:18

27:11,15 33:22

35:6,7 36:23

41:15 42:18 48:12

49:21 52:20 (12)

points 23:8 42:24

47:4

policies

7:10,16,19 8:8,18

16:5,6,25 21:13

28:21 35:3 38:16

48:14 50:17 (14)

policy 4:1 22:23

37:24 38:11,20

49:19,23 50:2 (8)

political 8:20

46:6 47:23 48:13

49:18 50:1,4 52:7

(8)

politics 48:20

polls 47:25

48:4,7,24 (4)

position 12:15

41:3

positions 51:10

possibility 5:16

possible 35:7

38:21

possibly 29:6

postmandate

44:2

posts 37:18

posture 11:19,20

postured 34:4

42:7

power 14:3 37:20

powers 37:17

38:22 45:24

46:10,11 (5)

practices 8:18

16:5,6,25 22:24

28:22 38:17 48:15

50:17 (9)

prayer 22:5

precedent 23:25

25:7,25

preczewski 20:14

26:1

predominantly

24:11

prejudice 9:20

10:1,10,12,13,16

11:8,14 42:20

43:22 44:9,10

45:1,14 46:20 (15)

premature 12:11

prematurely

12:17

prepared 52:24

present 18:18

presented 18:14

presents 43:2

49:25

preserved 46:12

presumption

10:6

pretrial 12:12,14

prevailed 12:3

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 63 of 67
Proceedings

10

previously 38:6

primarily 6:12

primary 9:15

32:3

principle 32:9

33:16

principles 46:11

prior 8:11 24:19

problem 15:11

42:1

problemsolving

40:24

procedural

11:19,20

procedure 10:3

proceed 18:20

36:19

process 46:5,6,12

profane 4:4

profound 6:3

prong 13:10

20:19 25:9 37:1

(4)

pronouncement

33:23

proper 23:21

26:13

properly 26:19

propose 31:11

proposed 9:22

14:20 31:6

38:3,15 44:14,18

45:8,8 (9)

proposition

32:17

protect 7:24 8:5

34:17 48:6,24

50:21 (6)

protected 4:25

5:6 6:14,21

48:22,23 (6)

protecting 35:11

39:15 41:5

protection 7:2

protective 49:20

prove 18:22 19:3

22:14 23:8 (4)

provide 13:5

17:22 22:19 28:1

32:10 34:21 (6)

providing 3:11

provision 27:20

32:19,20

psychic 33:12

public 3:9,11

4:24 7:3 38:9 39:8

(6)

pull 52:17

punishment 6:19

purported 10:19

purposes 14:1

45:11

pursuit 6:23

quick 47:4

quickly 51:20

quote 13:22 14:2

17:19 33:12 50:12

(5)

quotes 13:20

raise 31:2 42:24

raises 38:22

ramifications

7:20

ramirez 28:9

29:6

rarely 5:15

ravaged 50:9

reached 41:5

reading 17:16

reaffirmed 32:8

reality 46:4

realization 49:5

reason 12:7,23

27:16 39:22 47:20

(5)

reasons 24:20

26:16 31:18 37:10

46:18 (5)

rebuttal 3:15

26:25

rebutted 10:7

receive 8:2,6

recent 36:2 42:6

recently 20:14

recess 53:17

reconsider 30:21

record 2:8 53:3

54:7

redo 15:9

redress 13:6

17:23 22:19 23:11

28:1 31:25 32:22

33:11 37:12 40:7

50:21 (11)

redressability

12:19 13:10 20:19

25:10,14

26:12,19,21 27:19

31:17 32:2 33:14

45:11 52:12 (14)

redressable

33:4,9 37:19

38:25 (4)

redressed 33:6

40:14

redressing 17:9

49:7

reduce 17:5

refer 40:21

referred 32:14

43:6

regard 38:7,14

42:23

relationship 7:21

16:10

relied 32:16

relief 9:3,6 12:24

13:4,5 14:22

15:22 18:1

20:7,21 21:3 22:5

24:11,12 25:23

26:13 31:6,7,15

33:9 37:9,14,19

38:6,7,12,14,19,24

44:23 45:16,20

47:18 51:16 (34)

relies 11:24

religious 5:8

remains 14:14

15:16

remand 42:14

remedial 12:22

14:5 25:15

remedies 45:10

remedy 21:10,11

32:11 38:21 45:17

(5)

remotely 19:17

remove 49:6

51:11

render 10:17

replead 35:19

reply 13:7

report 50:11

52:18,19

reported 1:25

54:8,12

reporter 4:13

54:5

representative

46:17

representatives

38:2

request 12:21

15:22 25:22 37:8

42:9 45:15,19,20

51:16 (9)

requested 14:4

54:14

requests 14:21

26:20

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 64 of 67
Proceedings

11

require 37:23

required 47:19

49:4

requirement

13:23,25 31:17

32:13 33:14 (5)

requirements

37:6

requires 34:9

46:21

requiring 15:24

17:23 46:2

rescinded 21:12

research 36:10

reserve 3:14 30:5

resolution 11:1,3

29:5 41:23

46:1,2,3 (7)

resolve 9:16

12:9,15 31:20 (4)

resolved 16:8

26:14

resources 7:3

34:22 35:12 39:9

(4)

respect 14:10,19

15:12 16:13 22:14

25:10 41:16 (7)

respectfully

26:20

respond 3:18

20:22 26:24 36:23

51:4 (5)

rest 24:16 26:4

result 18:11

45:13

resulted 14:8

return 31:9

review 12:12

54:15

reviewed 3:2

rights 3:24,25

4:20,22,25

5:2,9,11,20

6:1,7,14,19,23

7:6,14,17,18,25

8:7,25 9:1

16:14,14 19:20

20:8 22:25 23:19

28:20 33:3 38:9

39:5,15 40:7

41:4,5 47:16

48:6,9,19,23

49:5,6,14,15,19

50:19,21 (48)

risk 16:23

risks 23:6

road 35:15

roadblock 49:7

roadblocks 49:4

rodgers 1:21

2:14,15

room 44:7

root 45:15

rooted 7:4

roper 5:10

rose 1:4

routine 8:10,13

rprcsr 1:25

rule 9:13 10:3

18:16,21 24:13,24

43:24 45:12 (8)

ruling 13:14

17:12 20:23 33:10

53:15 (5)

rulings 47:12

running 35:1

satisfaction

33:13

satisfied 14:1

41:25

satisfy 31:16

32:12 33:14

satisfying 32:2

saved 18:8 44:11

saving 21:19

saying 42:22

49:23 52:10

scholar 33:19

schools 4:24

scope 26:13

sean 1:22 2:18

30:14

season 50:10

section 38:10

43:5

secure 48:24

security 6:24

7:23 8:5 49:2 (4)

seek 7:6 8:24

12:24 17:23 31:6

32:1,4 37:20

38:5,8,13,15,18

44:24 (14)

seeks 6:12

45:9,16,20 (4)

selfdefense 7:25

selfpreservation

8:9

sentenced

5:13,15

separated 45:23

separation 37:17

38:22

separations

46:11

september 54:24

served 8:15

serving 5:20

sets 19:8,25

21:20 25:7 (4)

setting 23:25

settlement

40:21,22,22

41:16,17,23 (6)

severe 37:17

38:22

shadow 41:17

shall 41:4 42:8

shorter 32:2

shorthand 54:5

sidestep 23:15

signature 54:21

significant 7:20

23:6 36:14

silence 23:7

silent 14:12

15:14 24:15 25:1,

2,4,6,9,13,15,20,2

4 (12)

simmons 5:10

simple 27:16

simply 33:22

singer 1:23

2:19,20

situation 41:12

47:19

six 23:10 47:6,14

50:15 (4)

skeptical 31:22

sliced 37:2

snapchat 4:3

solely 48:12

solutions 41:5

solve 49:4

sophisticated

40:16

sorry 15:1 19:10

sort 21:23

sought 23:11

31:5,24 32:18

38:6 46:8 (6)

source 34:19

39:6,7,11 (4)

southern 7:9

speak 3:22

speaking 4:9,15

specific 12:21

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 65 of 67
Proceedings

12

13:20

specifically 16:2

18:12

speech 4:3,4 5:7

6:18 16:14 (5)

spirit 10:3 44:3

spoken 52:13

squarely 18:25

ss 54:1

staff 3:10

stage 11:21 19:5

stake 28:13,14

34:9 39:5 (4)

stand 3:16

standalone 32:4

standard 19:8

20:1 25:8

standards 43:4

standing 7:14

8:1,6 10:20,24

11:9 12:6

13:1,11,17 14:7

19:2 20:4,19

22:11 26:14

28:7,9 30:22

31:16,17 32:25

33:13

37:1,4,5,5,10 43:6

44:12,16 45:11

48:8 (33)

stands 10:9

start 15:7 19:12

started 4:11

state 5:5 49:10

53:6 54:1,5,19 (6)

stated 24:20

states 1:1,8

2:6,20 5:18 30:15

38:21 46:8 (8)

status 9:4 16:9,11

25:16 (4)

steen 18:6

step 15:2

stepping 39:14

stop 16:7 37:14

49:18

straight 30:17

strenuously 27:9

striking 43:1

strongly 39:24

40:1,3

student's 4:19

subject 8:17

10:22

submission 29:24

submit 51:7

submitted 3:2

substantial 17:9

43:2 47:11

substantially

31:24 37:12

suffice 20:4

31:22

sufficed 13:10

sufficient 19:2

47:10

sufficiently 28:15

suggest 14:16

suggesting 21:18

sum 45:12

summarized

51:20

summary 10:18

11:4 14:1 29:16

(4)

summer 50:8,9

supervise 14:4

supplement

51:18,22

supplemental

29:9 36:6,9 51:4

53:14 (5)

supports 11:10

supreme 4:5,6

5:5,11,23 19:7,25

20:22 21:17,22,24

22:12 23:17,24

24:7 25:6,25

27:5,17,25 29:21

31:3 32:8,15,24

33:15 36:1,13

37:2 42:6

43:1,6,11 (33)

surprising 13:8

survival 48:18

suspect 39:24

40:1,3

sustain 39:7

sustains 7:2

sworn 54:6

system 7:1

8:18,20 16:5

17:1,3,8 23:2

28:21 38:8 45:25

47:23 48:1,11

49:12,25 52:7 (17)

table 40:23 41:11

takeaways 31:14

technical 3:17

temperatures

50:8

ten 3:14

term 5:23 22:12

28:7

terms 35:5

41:9,10 44:1 (4)

testimony 37:14

54:7,8

texas 27:6,14,17

29:4 32:7,16,17

33:16 36:24 46:8

51:5 (11)

text 9:4

thank 2:21,25

3:1,6,10,20 4:18

22:4 29:11,23

30:5 46:24,25

47:3 51:2,25 52:1

53:16,17,18,19

(21)

theoretical 45:18

thereof 50:19

third 14:2

thoroughly 26:13

thoughts 27:10

threat 27:24

threatening 8:9

threats 4:1 50:10

threshold 26:18

throughout 23:9

28:24

thrown 35:24

tie 33:24

ties 47:21

today 3:9 6:11

8:4 28:8 30:18

34:5 35:22,23

36:5 48:11 51:19

52:24 53:12 (13)

touch 51:18

track 41:21,22

trajectory 6:5

transcript 36:10

53:13

54:6,10,12,15 (6)

transunion 28:9

29:6,9

treats 24:10

trial 10:5 12:9

26:14 31:9 39:23

40:11 (6)

tros 53:6

true 14:23,25

15:23 54:7,11 (5)

truly 49:17 50:20

trust 7:3 38:10

turn 9:13 30:1

turning 10:10

37:7

type 10:12 32:11

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 66 of 67
Proceedings

13

types 44:22

ultimately

43:13,15

un 52:17

unanimously

11:5

unconstitutional

7:10 16:5 17:3

32:20 33:2,8

38:11 (7)

unfettered 49:24

unintelligible

22:24

united 1:1,8

2:6,20 30:14

38:21 50:11 (7)

unjust 8:21

unjustly 4:24

unless 26:23

50:23

unlike 11:23

unquestionably

43:25

unreviewable

28:22

unsuccessful

45:3

unusual 6:19

usc 25:5

uzuegbunam

20:13 21:15

uzuegbunum

25:25

vacuum 33:4

vaguer 32:1

vantage 35:6,7

various 41:6

veneman 22:21

venue 31:2

via 7:25

vicious 50:10

view 10:23 24:1

43:12

vindicate 43:9

violated 48:3

violates 38:9

violation 16:7

21:14 23:2 26:6

50:19 (5)

violations 23:5

49:15 51:14

virginia 5:4

visavis 16:10

vital 6:22 49:6

vote 3:22 48:1,20

wait 26:24

walk 8:1 11:17

24:25

watching 33:20

weapon 7:7

weapons 7:12 8:1

wednesday 4:4

week 29:7 32:7

weekend 50:8

welcome 30:7

west 5:4

wildfire 50:10

wildfires 34:21

wisdom 37:24

wish 3:5

won 12:2

won't 31:22

worsening 23:6

25:18

worship 3:22

worst 50:12

52:18

worth 31:14

wrestle 24:13

wrong 24:23 26:8

wrongdoing 20:8

young 5:12 6:10

8:4 28:19 35:24

40:8 47:24 48:19

(8)

youngest 6:20

youth 6:20 8:24

9:4 46:14 (4)

201 38:10

212 16:17

471 11:10

993 49:3

1000 1:16 2:3

1052 10:9

1106 11:10

1114 22:21

1164 17:19

1168 13:23

1169 14:1

1171 14:5

1954 23:17

2005 5:10

2012 5:14

2021 1:15 2:1

54:18

2023 54:24

2201 25:5

151517 2:5

930262 54:23

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

ccreporting.com

Case 6:15-cv-01517-AA Document 504 Filed 06/29/21 Page 67 of 67