LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS et al v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT et al

UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN
CITIZENS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
V.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE
PRESIDENT, et al.,
Defendants,
and
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE,
Defendant-Intervenor.
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
V.
DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity
as President of the United States, et al.,
Defendants,
and
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE,
Defendant-Intervenor.
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
EDUCATION FUND, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
V.
DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity
as President of the United States, et al.,
Defendants,
and
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE,
Defendant-Intervenor.
Civil Action No. 25-0946 (CKK.)
Civil Action No. 25-0952 (CKK.)
Civil Action No. 25-0955 (CKK.)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(March 3, 2026)
1
Case 1:25-cv-00946-CKK Document 247 Filed 03/03/26 Page 1 of 2

Now pending before the Court is a [237] Motion to Intervene filed by prose Movant Jose
A. Perez. 	For the reasons explained in the parties' responses to Mr. Perez's Motion, the Court
concludes that Mr. Perez's request to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 is
untimely and Mr. Perez does not have a statutory right to intervene. See Dkt Nos. 238,240,241.
The Court shall therefore DENY the Motion.
The Court entered a final judgment on the claims on which Mr. Perez seeks to intervene
on October 31, 2025, and both the Federal Defendants and the Republican National Committee,
as Defendant-Intervenor, have filed notices of appeal. 	See Dkt. Nos. 217,227,229. 	Mr. Perez
had ample opportunity to move to intervene prior to final judgment, and allowing intervention
now would prejudice the parties by requiring costly relitigation of complex issues that the Court
has already decided. Accordingly, his motion is untimely.
Mr. Perez also does not have a statutory right to intervene in this matter. 	Neither the
Administrative Procedure Act nor any of the federal election statutes that Mr. Perez identifies in
his submissions establishes a right to third-party intervention in this action.
Finally, Mr. Perez's asserted interests have been adequately represented in this case by
the Federal Defendants and the Defendant-Intervenor, both of whom have mounted fulsome
defenses of the relevant provisions of Executive Order No. 14,248.
Accordingly, neither intervention as a matter of right under Rule 24(a) nor permissive
intervention under Rule 24(b) is appropriate here, and the Court shall DENY Mr. Perez's
Motion. An appropriate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Dated: March 3, 2026
2
, // · /# 	j/) 	' /l
L-0-Q.~ 	'\ ~ 	b.v- 	v; 0~
COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELL Y
United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-00946-CKK Document 247 Filed 03/03/26 Page 2 of 2