<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Ninth Circuit - Local Open Government Blog</title>
<link>http://www.localopengovernment.com/articles/in-the-courts/</link>
<description></description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2011</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:04:53 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:33:30 -0800</pubDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments from State of Washington</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on April 28, 2010 in the case of Doe v. Reed [Sam Reed, Washington State's Secretary of State].&nbsp; As we have <a href="http://www.localopengovernment.com/2010/04/articles/in-the-courts/us-supreme-court-will-hear-oral-argument-tomorrow-from-state-of-washington/">previously blogged</a>, the case addresses whether public release of&nbsp;referendum petition signatories under Washington&rsquo;s Public Records Act violates First Amendment rights.&nbsp; The justices sharply questioned the plaintiff's attorney, who sought to prevent release of the names of people who signed a referendum petition to require a public vote to overturn Washington&rsquo;s &ldquo;everything but marriage act.&rdquo;&nbsp; A <em>Seattle Times</em> article on the oral arguments including a public transcript is available <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011723164_scotus29.html">here</a>.&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.localopengovernment.com/2010/04/articles/in-the-courts/us-supreme-court-hears-oral-arguments-from-state-of-washington/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localopengovernment.com/2010/04/articles/in-the-courts/us-supreme-court-hears-oral-arguments-from-state-of-washington/</guid>
<category>Attorney General</category><category>Doe v. Reed</category><category>First amendment</category><category>In the courts</category><category>Legislation</category><category>Ninth Circuit</category><category>Protect Marriage Washington</category><category>Public Records</category><category>Public Records Act</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:04:53 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Foster Pepper Municipal Group</dc:creator>

</item>
<item>
<title>U.S. Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument Tomorrow From State of Washington</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Tomorrow (April 28, 2010), the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case of <em>Doe v. Reed</em> &ndash; addressing the question of whether the release of the names of referendum petition signatories pursuant to Washington&rsquo;s Public Records Act violates First Amendment rights.</p>
<p>The case involves the attempt to seek release of the names of people who signed a referendum petition to require a public vote to overturn the legislature&rsquo;s enactment of Washington&rsquo;s &ldquo;everything but marriage act.&rdquo;&nbsp; The Secretary of State was poised to release the names, when a group named &ldquo;Protect Marriage Washington&rdquo; and two individual signatories to the referendum petition (John Doe #1 and #2) sought a preliminary injunction in Federal District Court to stop the release.&nbsp; The District enjoined the release finding that it would impinge on First Amendment rights.&nbsp; The Ninth Circuit heard expedited review of that ruling and reversed the decision on October 15, 2009 &ndash; before the election.&nbsp;<em>Doe v. Reed</em>, 586 F.3d 671 (9th Cir. 2009).&nbsp; Four days later, however, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Ninth Circuit ruling, reinstated the District Court&rsquo;s preliminary injunction and accepted review.&nbsp;<em>Doe v. Reed</em>, No. 09-559.</p>
<p>The Washington Attorney General&nbsp; will argue the case tomorrow on behalf of the State&rsquo;s Secretary of State,&nbsp; and urge the Supreme Court to affirm the Ninth Circuit ruling.&nbsp; The State&rsquo;s position is that when people sign a referendum petition to substitute their view for that of the Governor and Legislature, they are engaging in a public legislative process and have no expectation of privacy when they sign such a referendum petition.&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.localopengovernment.com/2010/04/articles/in-the-courts/us-supreme-court-will-hear-oral-argument-tomorrow-from-state-of-washington/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localopengovernment.com/2010/04/articles/in-the-courts/us-supreme-court-will-hear-oral-argument-tomorrow-from-state-of-washington/</guid>
<category>Attorney General</category><category>Doe v. Reed</category><category>First amendment</category><category>In the courts</category><category>Legislation</category><category>Ninth Circuit</category><category>Protect Marriage Washington</category><category>Public Records</category><category>Public Records Act</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:26:38 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Will Patton</dc:creator>

</item>


</channel>
</rss>
