Nos.

09-35818, 09-35832
IN THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
_____________________________________________________________________________
_
_____________________________________________________________________________
_
ARTHUR WEST, et al )
Appellant-Intervener ) D.C. No. 09-cv-05456-BHS
v. ) 9th Cir. Nos. 09-35818, 09-35832
JOHN DOE, et al )
Plaintiff-Appellees ) APPELLANT-INTERVENER'S
v. ) MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE
SAM REED, et al, ) AND FOR TEMPORARY STAY
Defendant-Appellees )
______________________________)_______________________________________________
Comes now the Appellant-Intervener, and respectfully moves this court to
join all of the appeals in this case into one action, and for an order granting a
temporary stay from the 9th Circuit prohibiting the placement of R-71 on the
Washington State Ballot. prior to disclosure of the petition signatures and a State
Court review based upon such disclosure, or a final ruling holding that the
disclosure of the records to the public and/or the State Court violates the 1st
Amendment.
This action is necessary for judicial convenience, to preserve the status quo
pending appeal, and to remedy the effects of a pattern of obstruction of the filing of

APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR

WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501
appellant West's pleadings by the District Court Clerk, which has resulted in
repeated delays in the orderly progression of this case and an adverse impact upon
West's federally protected Due Process rights.
INTRODUCTION
This matter concerns a 1st Amendment challenge to a State Statute, RCW
42.56, the Washington State Public Records Act brought by Protect Marriage
Washington and Several undisclosed “John Doe” plaintiffs. A preliminary
injunction barring disclosure of signatures to a State referendum, R-71, as well as
a “protective order” abridging the authority of State Courts to conduct public
review of the Secretary of State's certification of the controversial ballot measure
was also entered by the District Court, in an egregious violation of the State of
Washington's 11th Amendment immunity.
As the only individual registered voter with actual 1st Amendment rights to
disclosure of the public records at issue, West has a legitimate interest and standing
to participate in this appeal. As the only party with pending proceedings in the
Washington State Supreme Court seeking disclosure under RCW 42.56 and
appealing the Secretary of State's ballot certification, West is undeniably a
necessary party to a just adjudication of the issues in this case.
Where Families United and WASHCOG,have been allowed intervention,
upon a lesser showing, it was a denial of equal protection for West to be denied
similar status, even temporarily, based upon the deliberate obstruction of the filing
of his pleadings by the District Court Clerk. This inequity is unconscionable and
should be immediately remedied in the interests of justice.

APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR

WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501
 Appellant-Intervener West seeks a preliminary injunction from this Court
preventing the Washington State Secretary of State from placing State Referendum
R-71 on the ballot until the District Court's prior restraint upon disclosure of the
signatures upon the referendum petition is lifted and a State Court review is
conducted in the absence of unlawful District Court interference in the form of an
unconstitutional prior restraint violative of the 1st and 11th Amendments.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 29, 2009, at the request of Protect Marriage Washington and two
“John Doe” plaintiffs (Dkt 9) The Honorable Judge Settle of the Western
Washington District Court entered an injunction prohibiting public disclosure of
the signatures on a petition for State Referendum R-71, as required by the express
terms of State law RCW 42.56.
Appellant West requested disclosure of the public records related to
referendum R71 on August 4, 2009.( Dkt. 23, exhibit 3) The State denied
disclosure on the basis of the District Court's injunction. On August 6, the State
then moved to join West, along with Families United and the Washington Coalition
on Open Government, who had also requested the R-71records. On August 24 the
honorable judge settle denied the States motion, but required notice to be provided
to the requesting parties.
West moved to intervene on August 31. However, the District Court Clerk
obstructed justice by refusing to file his motion (Dkt 58) or the supporting
declarations (Dkt 60-61)until after the September 3 hearing.

APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR

WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501
 On September 3, although Judge Settle allowed intervention by Families
United and WASHCOG, (based upon no greater showing than that made by West)
he denied West's motion to intervene on a “preliminary basis” based upon the
clerk's obstruction of justice in failing to docket West's pleadings.
On September 10, 2009, Judge Settle entered an order extending the
preliminary injunction, without ruling on West's application.
On September 11, 2009 West filed a notice of appeal of the Court';s rulings
and paid the $455 appeal fee. However, the District Court Clerk again obstructed
justice by failing to docket his appeal or transmit it to the 9th Circuit Court of
appeals until after the State had filed a notice and paid its fee on September 15.
WASHCOG has filed a separate appeal of their own, although West has apparently
not been served with their pleadings.
Meanwhile, down in the trenches of the State Court, West had (on the
morning of September 3) filed a State Superior Court action (No. 09-2-2140-3) to
contest the ballot certification and to compel disclosure of the contested records
under RCW 42.56. Families United filed a later, duplicative action (No. 09-2-2145-
4) that afternoon. West scheduled a hearing for September 11 before the Honorable
Judge Hirsch. In an attempt to deny West a fair hearing based upon disclosure of
the signatures, Families United subsequently scheduled an earlier “sham” hearing
before judge McPhee for September 8, to be conducted in the absence of any
attempt to compel disclosure of the signatures to the Court.
Although West had a prior action, Judge McPhee on September 8, denied
West's motion to abate or consolidate on the basis that his claims were different
and would take longer to adjudicate. West's objections to the conduct of the hearing
APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR
WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501
without his participation and based upon a sealed or undisclosed record were
disregarded.
The honorable Judge McPhee then proceeded to conduct a sham
adjudication of the Families United ballot challenge without allowing West to be
heard and without requiring production or examination of the petition signatures,
the only relevant evidence as to their sufficiency. Families united subsequently, on
September 11, stipulated to a dismissal of their claims for production of the
signatures to the Superior Court for its examination, demonstrating the sham nature
of their participation in the matter as spoilers acting to deny any actual review of
the petition signatures and to obstruct West's attempts to .secure judicial review
based upon the evidence.
When West, (later on the 8th and on the 11th) applied for production of the
signatures and relief in his prior case, he was informed by both Judge Hirsch and
Tabor that the underlying issues in his case had already been decided by Judge
McPhee, and that they were dispositive of his claims.
Ludicrously, the West v. Reed case, which judge McPhee has refused to join
with Families United on the basis that it would delay adjudication, was dismissed
on September 11, and West's motions to vacate the previous orders due to their
many internal inconsistencies were brushed aside by the Thurston County judiciary
like so many pesky flies. West was informed by Judge Hirsch that the federal court
order required her to dismiss his state action for disclosure and that Judge McPhee
had already decided the ballot challenge without the actual records or any
opportunity for West to even object to the lack of evidence.

APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR

WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501
 On September 15, West, by this time thoroughly incensed by the pattern of
suppression of his pleadings, exclusion of his issues, and general due process
violations grossly violative of his right to access to the Courts, filed his third action
in the form of companion appeals of the families united and West rulings of
September 11.On September 16, The Washington State Supreme Court opened two
Appeals, 83612-4 and 83615-9, on both the West and Families United cases, and
set a hearing on a motion to consolidate for October 8, 2009
West suspects that the District Court's desire to apply the 1st Amendment in a
selective manner violative of equal protection of the law on behalf of those with
whom it shares a political ideology has improperly influenced its judgment and
precipitated repeated suppression of West's pleadings and a denial of his right to
reasonably participate in this case. The delay resulting from suppression of West's
pleadings have severely impacted West's ability to present his case, a violation of
the 1st ,4th , and 14th Amendments far more serious than anything alleged by those
upstanding members of the community who dare not show their faces in the broad
light of day w2hile they seek to restrict ever citizen and voter's rights to disclosure
of the records necessary to safeguard the integrity of the petition gathering process.
In regard to the issue of an appropriate stay in this case, West believes that
the appropriate remedy is not disclosure of the records, but rather a stay upon the
placement of R-71 on the State Ballot pending the release of the R-71 records to
the State Courts for a proper review of the Secretary's Ballot Certification.
While ordinarily, the 11th Amendment would bar such an order, the District
court has already intruded into the exclusive province of the Washington State
Court and dictated how they could conduct a ballot certification, to the degree that
APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR
WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501
West has been denied his right to disclosure of records that are defined as public
under State law and has also been denied his right to a State Court review of a
ballot certification based upon disclosure to the Superior Court of the records
necessary to such review.
To maintain the status quo pending full review by this Court, the District
Court, the State Supreme Court and (quite possibly) the Superior Court on remand,
it is only equitable that an order issue under the seal of the 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals declaring that the placement of R-71 on the ballot be stayed pending a
final determination of the status of the records and a proper State Court review
based upon disclosure of the petitions to the State Court.
This is especially necessary due to the secretive nature of the John Doe
plaintiffs and the fact that the only “identified” individuals who have provided
declarations are admitted signature gatherer who also had a role in the oversight of
the certification process itself.
The possibility-even if remote-that the Federal District Court has been a
party to a judicially sanctioned cover-up of petition signature fraud at the behest of
those committing the signature fraud is so unconscionable; and the potential and
irremediable damage to the integrity of the state electoral process and public
confidence in the integrity of the ballot is so great, that this Court has a duty to act
to ameliorate the damage caused by the impermissible meddling of the federal
district court in the State electoral and judicial process.
The violation of West's 1st Amendment rights (as well as those concerning
due process and equal protection) evident from the proceedings in this matter far
eclipse any claims made by those individuals whose participation in the public
APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR
WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501
process takes place behind the judicial equivalent of a veiling white sheet. As a
voter and a litigant in the State Court with a challenge to the Secretary of State's
determination regarding sufficiency of the signatures to R-71, West's interest in this
matter is clearly apparent and undeniable, and the citizen's rights to the integrity of
the referendum process requires that the placement of R-71 on the ballot be stayed
pending resolution of the status -and disclosure to the State Court-of the signatures
on the R-71 petition.
In order to preserve the separation of powers and the integrity of State
judical and electoral process, it is incumbent upon this court to act to forestall the
potentially disastrous effect of ill-advised federal meddling with powers reserved
to the State of Washington and the clearly established constitutional rights of a
citizen and voter, under false color of preserving some undisclosed citizens' 1st
Amendment rights, especially when the “John Doe” plaintiffs concerned may have
some nefarious readson for seeking to conceal the signatures that they themselves
gathered in order to repeal the State of Washingtons domestic partnership law..

Done this day of September 16, 2009. _____________

ARTHUR WEST

APPELLANT INTERVENERS ARTHUR

WEST,
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 120 State Ave
NE #1497
AND FOR TEMPORARYSTAY Olympia,
Washington, 98501