Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed...
Transcript of Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed...
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 1 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 2 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 3 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 4 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 5 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 6 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 7 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 8 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 9 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 10 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 11 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 12 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 13 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 14 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 15 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 16 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 17 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 18 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 19 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 20 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 21 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 22 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 23 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 24 of 25
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5 Filed 07/21/11 Page 25 of 25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________ ) STATE OF TEXAS, ) ) Plaintiff, )
) v. )
) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ) ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., in his official ) capacity as Attorney General ) of the United States, )
) No. 1:11-cv-01303 (RMC) ) Defendant, )
) and ) )
SENATOR WENDY DAVIS, ) REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY, ) JOHN JENKINS, VICKI BARGAS, ) and ROMEO MUÑOZ, ) ) Proposed Defendant-Intervenors. ) __________________________________________)
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS
NOW COME The Honorable WENDY DAVIS, The Honorable MARC VEASEY,
JOHN JENKINS, VICKI BARGAS and ROMEO MUÑOZ, Defendant-Intervenors in the above-
captioned action, and answer Plaintiff’s Complaint as follows:
First Affirmative Defense
The State of Texas’ proposed State Senate Plan and the proposed Congressional Plan
violate Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §1793c. The declaratory relief requested
in Plaintiff’s complaint should, therefore, be denied.
Answers to Allegations
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 1 of 6
2
1. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 1.
2. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 2.
3. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 3, but deny the Court is authorized to
declare Plaintiff’s redistricting plans compliant with Section 5.
4. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 4.
5. Intervenors admit that Texas gained four new congressional districts following the
release of the 2010 census and admit the total population of Texas set forth in this
paragraph. Intervenors assert that the 2010 United States Census statistics speak for
themselves.
6. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 6.
7. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 7.
8. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 8.
9. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
10. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
11. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
12. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 12 as to the effective date of the State
Board of Education Plan. The State Board of Education Plan is legally unenforceable as
law unless and until preclearance is obtained under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the other allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 2 of 6
3
13. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
14. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
15. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
16. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
17. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
18. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
19. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 19. The State House map is legally
unenforceable as law unless and until preclearance is obtained under Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act.
20. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
21. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
22. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
23. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 23.
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 3 of 6
4
24. This paragraph states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a
response is required, Intervenors deny the allegations of this paragraph.
25. Intervenors admit to the substantive allegations of paragraph 25. Intervenors do not
admit to the accuracy of Attachment 4 to Plaintiff’s Complaint.
26. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 26. The State Senate map is legally
unenforceable as law unless and until preclearance is obtained under Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act.
27. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 27.
28. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 28.
29. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 29.
30. Intervenors admit that Texas gained four new congressional districts following the
release of the 2010 census and admit the total population of Texas set forth in this
paragraph. Intervenors assert that the 2010 United States Census statistics speak for
themselves and denies the remaining parts of paragraph 30.
31. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 31.
32. Intervenors admit the allegations of paragraph 32
33. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
34. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 34.
35. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 35.
36. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 36.
37. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 37.
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 4 of 6
5
38. This paragraph contains no factual allegations and thus requires no response. To the
extent that there are any factual allegations contained in paragraph 38, Intervenors deny
the allegations of paragraph 38..
39. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
40. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
41. This paragraph contains no factual allegations and thus requires no response. To the
extent that there are any factual allegations contained in paragraph 41, Intervenors deny
the allegations of paragraph 41.
42. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
43. Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of the allegations asserted in this paragraph and therefore deny the same.
44. This paragraph contains no factual allegations and thus requires no response. To the
extent that there are any factual allegations contained in paragraph 44, Intervenors deny
the allegations of paragraph 44.
45. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 45.
46. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 46.
47. This paragraph contains no factual allegations and thus requires no response. To the
extent that there are any factual allegations contained in paragraph 47, Intervenors deny
the allegations of paragraph 47.
48. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 48.
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 5 of 6
6
49. Intervenors deny the allegations of paragraph 49.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ J. Gerald Hebert___ J. GERALD HEBERT D.C. Bar #447676 Attorney at Law 191 Somerville Street, #405 Alexandria, VA 22304 Telephone: 703-628-4673 Email: [email protected]
PAUL M. SMITH MICHAEL B. DESANCTIS JESSICA RING AMUNSON CAROLINE D.LOPEZ Jenner & Block LLP 1099 New York Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Tel: (202) 639-6000 Fax: (202) 639-6066
Attorneys for Proposed Defendant-Intervenors
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-1 Filed 07/21/11 Page 6 of 6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________ ) STATE OF TEXAS, ) ) Plaintiff, )
) v. )
) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ) ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., in his official ) capacity as Attorney General ) of the United States, )
) No. 1:11-cv-01303 (RMC) ) Defendant, )
) and ) )
SENATOR WENDY DAVIS, ) REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY, ) JOHN JENKINS, VICKI BARGAS, ) and ROMEO MUÑOZ, ) ) Proposed Defendant-Intervenors. ) __________________________________________)
ORDER
Before the Court is a motion to intervene by WENDY DAVIS, MARC VEASEY,
JOHN JENKINS, VICKI BARGAS and ROMEO MUNOZ. Movants seek either
intervention as of right, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a), or permissive intervention,
see Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(1). Plaintiff opposes intervention, and defendants do not oppose
permissive intervention.
Upon consideration of the motion, the parties’ several memoranda, and the entire
record herein, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion to intervene as defendant is
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-2 Filed 07/21/11 Page 1 of 2
GRANTED; it is further ORDERED that Defendant-Intervenors’ proposed Answer to
the complaint shall be deemed filed as of this date.
_________________________ United States District Judge Dated:
Case 1:11-cv-01303-RMC-TBG-BAH Document 5-2 Filed 07/21/11 Page 2 of 2