Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
CENTRAL DIVISION
In re: )
)
JOHN FITISEMANU, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. )Case No. 1:18-CV-36CW
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
et al., )
)
Defendants. )
September 6, 2018
1
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
2
1 Salt Lake City, Utah, Thursday, September 6, 2018
2 * * *
6 their appearance.
17 and Lauren Beebe, both from the Kirkland & Ellis firm in
18 Washington, D.C.
3
1 clear to me that the intervenors should participate in
4
1 MR. WILLIAMS: Indeed it does, Your Honor,
19 have.
5
1 is in making sure that the people of American Samoa who
8 Honor, that it's the American Samoan people and it's the
23 this different?
6
1 Samoan Government was actually established based on a
10 it doesn't.
24 American citizens.
7
1 THE COURT: So you're representing that this
4 has taken.
8 MR. WILLIAMS: On --
8
1 democratic representative body, Your Honor. It's as
10 States.
22 transaction?
9
1 text of the Fourteenth Amendment to birthright
2 citizenship.
9 governments --
12 or B.
23 friends of the court who know more about what the Samoan
10
1 THE COURT: None of those issues were
12 issue?
16 United States.
11
1 American Samoan residents as a result of this court's
10 down.
13 New Jersey.
16 fast.
12
1 this case are, are changing that status. The United
13
1 Samoan Government is the only entity before you that
4 issue for us and for our culture and for our society.
6 instance.
22 Interior.
25 or as a matter of amicus?
14
1 MR. WILLIAMS: As permissive intervenors,
20 and our saying, no, there's more than that, Your Honor,
23 upon.
15
1 procedure? I now have pending before me motions for
16
1 adopt and it's the sort of positions that we would
2 reject today.
17 Your Honor.
20 you're making?
17
1 to intervene that we've provided. We've briefed these
7 Honor.
10 in as uncontested?
17 example.
18
1 give you a concrete example, if it would be helpful.
11 But these are the sort of facts that, as I've said, the
20 history of us.
19
1 because they already know what our defense is. It
9 by them?
12 a way that, as Your Honor may have seen from our papers,
20
1 MR. WILLIAMS: I think the one last point I
21
1 think, and we still do not believe, that intervention is
2 appropriate.
22
1 showing. The movants, instead, concede on page 8 of
7 be so, that we've heard now for the first time, and we
13 not make that they would make. And indeed this is the
23
1 forfeiture on this point, or their -- I guess that's not
6 the best way you can frame the argument of the movants
10 has, but their motives are not the same. The United
24
1 argument that they would make beyond that which the
13 question.
25
1 just one of the many indignities and injuries being
10 movants had complied with Rule 24, they might have filed
21 for.
26
1 that. First, it's obviously a discretionary judgment of
27
1 for intervention, that's a potentially far-reaching
2 precedent.
12 irrelevant issues.
22 they not?
28
1 participate as amicus curiae. That would enable them to
22 permissive intervention.
29
1 MR. PEZZI: Just very briefly, Your Honor.
8 than what I'm about to say, unless Your Honor has any
30
1 Unless you have any other questions, that's
2 all I have.
20 States Government.
31
1 filing of a motion for summary judgment, we are ready,
32
1 plaintiffs. We weren't given notice of the complaint
20 plaintiff is asking.
22 ask that you grant our motion under Rule 24(a). And I
33
1 hearing?
13 will be allowed.
15 recess.
17 * * *
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
34
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
3 State of Utah
9 at the time and place set forth herein and was taken
14 taken.
17
18
19 Karen Murakami
21
22
23
24
25
35