the Democratic National Committee v. Katie Hobbs

FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL
COMMITTEE; DSCC, AKA
Democratic Senatorial Campaign
Committee; THE ARIZONA
DEMOCRATIC PARTY,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
KATIE HOBBS, in her official
capacity as Secretary of State of
Arizona; MARK BRNOVICH, Attorney
General, in his official capacity as
Arizona Attorney General,
Defendants-Appellees,
STATE OF ARIZONA,
Intervenor,
THE ARIZONA REPUBLICAN PARTY;
BILL GATES, Councilman; SUZANNE
KLAPP, Councilwoman; DEBBIE
LESKO, Sen.; TONY RIVERO, Rep.,
Intervenor-Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-15845
D.C. No.
2:16-cv-01065-
DLR
ORDER

-- 1 of 3 --

DNC V. HOBBS 2
On Remand from the United States Supreme Court
Filed August 30, 2021
Before: Sidney R. Thomas, Chief Judge, and Diarmuid F.
O’Scannlain, William A. Fletcher, Marsha S. Berzon,
Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Richard R. Clifton, Jay S. Bybee,
Consuelo M. Callahan, Mary H. Murguia, Paul J. Watford,
and John B. Owens, Circuit Judges.
Order
COUNSEL
Bruce V. Spiva, Marc E. Elias, Elisabeth C. Frost, and
Amanda R. Callais, Perkins Coie LLP, Washington, D.C.;
Daniel C. Barr and Sarah R. Gonski, Perkins Coie LLP,
Phoenix, Arizona; Joshua L. Kaul, Perkins Coie LLP,
Madison, Wisconsin; for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Mark Brnovich, Attorney General; Joseph A. Kanefield,
Chief Deputy and Chief of Staff; Brunn W. Roysden III,
Division Chief; Oramel H. (O.H.) Skinner, Solicitor General;
Kate B. Sawyer, Assistant Solicitor General; Katlyn J. Divis,
Andrew G. Pappas, Joseph E. La Rue, and Karen J. Hartman-
Tellez, Assistant Attorneys General; Office of the Attorney
General, Phoenix, Arizona; for Defendants-Appellees.
Brett W. Johnson and Colin P. Ahler, Snell & Wilmer LLP,
Phoenix, Arizona, for Intervenor-Defendants-Appellees.

-- 2 of 3 --

DNC V. HOBBS 3
ORDER
The Supreme Court recently reversed the judgment in this
case, and remanded it to this court for further proceedings.
Brnovich v. Democratic Nat’l Comm., 594 U.S. ___, 141 S.
Ct. 2321 (2021). In light of the Supreme Court’s decision,
the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
The copy of this order shall act as and for the mandate of
this court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

-- 3 of 3 --