DOCSLIB.ORG

In the Iowa District Court for Polk County State of Iowa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In the Iowa District Court for Polk County State of Iowa E-FILED 20152015 FEBFEB 0909 1:151:15 PMPM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FFOROR POLK COUNTY ___________________________________________________________________________ STATE OF IOWA ex rel. ) THOMAS J. MILLER, ) No. EQCE 73545 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE MCGRAW-HILL COMPANIES, INC. and ) CONSENT JUDGMENT STANDARD & POOR’SPOOR'S FINANCIAL ) SERVICES LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) ______________________________________________________________________________ THIS MATTER came before the Court on the joint requestrequest of the Plaintiff, State of Iowa ex rel. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General of Iowa, and thethe Defendants, McGraw-Hill Financial, Inc. and Standard & Poor’sPoor's FinancialFinancial Services,Services, LLC, for the Court to enter Judgment in accordance with the terms and conditions in the SettlementSettlement Agreement that was attached to the Unopposed Motion for Entry of ConsentConsent JudgmentJudgment asas EExhibitxhibit A.A. TheThe language of that Settlement Agreement is incorporated into this JudgJudgmentment by reference including, without limitation, the statement ofof factsfacts annexedannexed toto thethe SSettlementettlement Agreement.Agreement. The Court, having considered the joint request and otherwise being fufullylly advised in the premises, finds that the request is well taken and shall be GRANTED. Court costscosts (if any) shall be paid by Defendants. SO ORDERED. E-FILED 20152015 FEBFEB 0909 1:151:15 PMPM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Agreed and Approved as to Form and Substance by: FOR PLAINTIFF: /s/ Steve St. Clair _________________ Steve St. Clair Assistant Attorney General Office of the Iowa Attorney General 1305 East Walnut Des Moines, Iowa 50319 Phone: (515) 281-5926 [email protected] FOR DEFENDANTS: /s/ Mark E. Weinhardt ______________ Mark E. Weinhardt Weinhardt & Logan, P.C. 2600 Grand Avenue, Suite 450 Des Moines, IA 50312 Phone: (515) 244-3100 [email protected] 2 E-FILED 20152015 FEBFEB 0909 1:151:15 PMPM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT State ofof Iowa Courts Type: ORDER FOR CONSENT DECREE Case Number Case Title EQCE073545 STATE OF IOWA VS THE MCGRAW HILL COMPANIES INC ET AL So Ordered Robert B. Hanson, District Court judge, Fifth Judicial District of Iowa Electronically signedsigned on on 2015-02-09 2015-02-09 13:15:42 13:15:42 pagepage 3 of 3 E-FILED 20152015 FEBFEB 0404 8:188:18 AMAM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY STATE OF IOWA ex rel. ) THOMAS J. MILLER, ) No. EQCE 73545 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENTRY THE MCGRAW-HILL COMPANIES, INC, and ) OF CONSENT JUDGMENT STANDARD & POOR'S FINANCIAL ) SERVICES LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) Plaintiff State of Iowa ex rel. Attorney General Thomas J. Miller respectfully moves this Court to enter the Consent Judgment that is being separately and contemporaneously submitted to this Court as a proposed ruling. The Consent Judgment, a copy of which is attached hereto, is a proposed final judgment resolving the above-captioned matter. The undersigned has coordi- nated with opposing counsel in producing the proposed Consent Judgment, and counsel for De- fendants Mark Weinhardt has agreed that the instant motion may be characterized as unopposed. Respectfully submitted, THOMAS J. MILLER IOWA ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFFREY THOMPSON Deputy Attorney General E-FILED 20152015 FEBFEB 0404 8:188:18 AMAM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT STEVE ST. CLAIR PATRICK MADIGAN NATHAN BLAKE Assistant Attorneys General Hoover Building, 2nd Floor 1305 E. Walnut Street Des Moines, IA 50319 Phone: (515) 281-5926 Facsimile: (515) 281-6771 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff 2 E-FILED 20152015 FEB FEB 0404 8:188:18 AMAM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY STATE OF IOWA ex rel. THOMAS J. MILLER, No, EQCE 73545 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA, Plaintiff, V. THE MCGRAW-HILL COMPANIES, INC. and CONSENT JUDGMENT STANDARD & POOR'S FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC, Defendants. THIS MATTER came before the Court on the joint request of the Plaintiff, State of Iowa ex rel. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General of Iowa, and the Defendants, McGraw-Hill Financial, Inc. and Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC, for the Court to enter Judgment in accordance with the terms and conditions in the Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit A, the language of which is incorporated into the Judgment by reference including, without limitation, the statement of facts annexed thereto. The Court, having considered the joint request and otherwise being fully advised in the premises, finds that the request is well taken and shall be GRANTED. Court costs (if any) shall be paid by Defendants. SO ORDERED. (02030756,DOCX) E-FILED 20152015 FEBFEB 0404 8:188:18 AMAM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Agreed and Approved as to Form and Substance by: FOR PLAINTIFF: Steve St. Clair Assistant Attorney General Office of the Iowa Attorney General 1305 East Walnut Des Moines, Iowa 50319 Phone: (515) 281-5926 Steve.stclair@iowa,gov FOR DEFENDANTS: ark E. Weinhardt jd/'4/tr Weinhardt & Logan, P.C. 2600 Grand Avenue, Suite 450 Des Moines, IA 50312 Phone: (515) 244-3100 rnweinhardt@weinhardtlogancom Floyd Abrams, pro hac vice Jason M. Hall, pro hac vice Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP 80 Pine Street New York, NY 10005 Phone: (212) 701-3000 [email protected] 102030756.DOCX) E-FILED 20152015 FEBFEB 0404 8:188:18 AMAM POLKPOLK - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT 1 Settlement Agreement 2 This Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between, on the one 3 hand, the United States, acting through the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ"), 4 and the States of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, 5 Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, 6 Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington, and the District of 7 Columbia, acting through their respective Attorneys General (each of the District of 8 Columbia and the states set forth above referred to individually as "State" and 9 collectively as "the States"), and, on the other hand, McGraw Hill Financial, Inc. 10 (formerly known as The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.) and Standard & Poor's 11 Financial Services LLC (collectively "Defendants"). The United States, the States, and 12 Defendants are collectively referred to herein as "the Parties." 13 Recitals 14 1. On February 4, 2013, the United States filed in United States District Court 15 for the Central District of California the case captioned United States v, McGraw-Hill 16 Companies, Inc., and Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC, No. CV 13-00779- 17 DOC (the "US Case"). 18 2. On the following dates, in the following courts, the States filed the cases 19 captioned as follows (collectively, the "State Cases"): 20 State Filing Court Caption Date 21 Arizona 2/5/2013 Arizona Superior Arizona ex rel. Brnovich v, The 22 Court, Maricopa McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., and 23 County Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC, No. CV2013-001188 24 Arkansas 2/5/2013 Arkansas Circuit Arkansas ex rel. McDaniel v. The 25 Court, Pulaski McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., and County Standard & Poor's Financial Services 26 LLC No. 60CV-13-534 27 28 1 • E-FILEDI-1 II-1-1-1 GU2015 I .0 FEBI I-I-3 %Pi'04 8:181.). IV AM/-1.11,1 POLKI WI-1% - 1CLERK/4,1-1-IMN. OFWI DISTRICTVI...711M., I COURT%...I.JIJIN. I 1 State Filing Court Caption Date 2 California 2/5/2013 California People of the State of California v. 3 Superior Court, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 4 San Francisco Standard & Poor's Financial Services County LLC, and Does 1-100, No. CGC-13- 5 528491 6 Colorado 2/5/2013 District Court, State of Colorado ex rel. Coffman v. City and County The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 7 of Denver, State and Standard & Poor's Financial 8 of Colorado Services LLC, No. 2013-CV-30537 Connecticut 3/10/2010 Connecticut Connecticut v. The McGraw-Hill 9 Superior Court, Companies, Inc., and Standard & 10 Judicial District Poor's Financial Services LLC, No. of Hartford at HHD-cv-10-6008838-S 11 Hartford 12 Delaware 2/5/2013 Delaware Delaware v. The McGraw-Hill Superior Court, Companies, Inc., and Standard & 13 New Castle Poor's Financial Services LLC, No. N 14 County 13C-02-044 District of 2/5/2013 D.C. Superior District of Columbia v. The McGraw- 15 Columbia Court Hill Companies, Inc., and Standard & 16 Poor's LLC, Civ. No. 2013 CA 000997 B 17 Idaho 2/5/2013 Idaho 4th Judicial Idaho ex rel. Wasden v. The 18 District Court, McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., and Ada County Standard & Poor's Financial Services 19 LLC, No. CV OC 1302154 20 Illinois 1/25/2012 Illinois Circuit People of the State of Illinois v. The Court, Cook McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., and 21 County Standard & Poor's Financial Services 22 LLC, No. 12CH02535 Indiana 6/27/2013 Marion County Indiana ex rel. Mihalik v. McGraw 23 Superior Court Hill Financial, Inc., and Standard & 24 Poor's Financial Services LLC, No. 49D03-1306-PL-025757. 25 Iowa 2/5/2013 Iowa District Iowa ex rel. Miller v. The McGraw- 26 Court, Polk Hill Companies, Inc., and Standard & County Poor's Financial Services LLC, No. 27 EQCE73545 28 2 E-FILED1-m1 I I-I-L7 GIJ2015 IV FEBI I-L7 IJ04.-1. V-8:18 I V IAM-11V1 IPOLK- WI-FN. - -%.,1-1-11.1"1. CLERK OFWI DISTRICT1-7I...1 I 11.1,...• I COURT%slat./ IA I State Filing Court Caption Date 2 Maine 2/5/2013 Maine Superior Maine v. The McGraw-Hill 3 Court, Kennebec Companies, Inc., and Standard & 4 County Poor's Financial Services LLC, No. BCD-CV-14-49 5 Mississippi 5/10/2011 Chancery Court Mississippi ex rel.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Of Consum R Ot Io the Individual Frame Quality Will Vary
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. This microfiche was produced from documents received for al sis Digest trlcluslon in the NCJRS data base. Since NCJRS cannot exercise cr ntrol over the physical condition of the documents submitted, of Consum r ot io the individual frame quality will vary. The resolution chart on this frame may be used to evaluate the document quality. ~se Law June, 1976 ' , ---1.0 , , - \. The National Associatic)n of Attorneys General 1.1 .:. ~. -- 18 Committee on the Office of Attomey General ~--- 14 1.6 11111~25 11111 . Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply with the standards set forth in 41CFR 101·11.504 Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the author(s) and do not represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LA W ENFORC EMENT ASS 1ST AHC E AD MINI STRATION NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFERENCE SERVICE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20531 12 1476 )a~~: filmed The National Association of Attorneys General Committee on the Office of Attorney General SEP AlqALYSIS AND DIGEST OF CONSUMER PROTECTION CASE LAW A grant from the Law Enforcement Assistance Adminis­ tration of the U. S. Department of Justice has helped finance this report. The fact that LEAA is furnishing financial support does not necessarily irtdicate its con­ currence in the statements herein. Staff Attorney Reginald Watkins was primarily re­ sponsible for the 1976 update. Committee on the Office of Attorney General 3901 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 Price: $3.50 June, 1976 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEYS GENERAL COMMITTEE ON THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL Chairman Attorney General Theodore L.
    [Show full text]
  • The Common Law Powers of the New York State Attorney General
    THE COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL Bennett Liebman* The role of the Attorney General in New York State has become increasingly active, shifting from mostly defensive representation of New York to also encompass affirmative litigation on behalf of the state and its citizens. As newly-active state Attorneys General across the country begin to play a larger role in national politics and policymaking, the scope of the powers of the Attorney General in New York State has never been more important. This Article traces the constitutional and historical development of the At- torney General in New York State, arguing that the office retains a signifi- cant body of common law powers, many of which are underutilized. The Article concludes with a discussion of how these powers might influence the actions of the Attorney General in New York State in the future. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 96 I. HISTORY OF THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ................................ 97 A. The Advent of Affirmative Lawsuits ............. 97 B. Constitutional History of the Office of Attorney General ......................................... 100 C. Statutory History of the Office of Attorney General ......................................... 106 II. COMMON LAW POWERS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL . 117 A. Historic Common Law Powers of the Attorney General ......................................... 117 B. The Tweed Ring and the Attorney General ....... 122 C. Common Law Prosecutorial Powers of the Attorney General ................................ 126 D. Non-Criminal Common Law Powers ............. 136 * Bennett Liebman is a Government Lawyer in Residence at Albany Law School. At Albany Law School, he has served variously as the Executive Director, the Acting Director and the Interim Director of the Government Law Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Harrison County Resource Directory
    This directory is intended as a working document and is updated as needed. If you have corrections or would like additions made Harrison to the information contained here, please contact Iowa State University Extension and Outreach Harrison County at 712-644- 2105. County Some agencies are listed under more than one heading depending on the services they offer. Resource Harrison County Extension and Outreach 304 East 7th Street Directory Logan IA 51546-1351 712-644-2105 FAX: 712-644-2100 Emergency Fire Rescue Police Iowa State University Extension and Outreach programs are available to all without regard to race, color, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, sex, marital status, disability, or status as a U.S. veteran. Inquiries can be directed to the Director of 911 Equal Opportunity and Compliance, 3280 Beardshear Hall, (515) 294-7612. Cooperative Extension Service, Iowa State University of Science and Technology, and the United States Department of Agriculture cooperating. {06.2014 version} {please replace older versions} Iowa 2-1-1 New National Number for Access to All Human Services Help for all your needs, one call 2-1-1 Acknowledgements Iowa State University Extension & Outreach Carole Gorham West Central Community Action HeadStart Laura Hansen Jolene McDonald Learning for Life, HCHPH Sherri Webb Harrison Monona Shelby Early Childhood/Decat Diane Foss Southwest Iowa MHDS Region Lonnie Maguire Funding for printing this directory provided by Community Partnerships for Protecting Children
    [Show full text]
  • Appellant Final Reply Brief (164.89
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA Supreme Court No. 20-0477 ROB SAND, Auditor of the State of Iowa, Applicant-Appellee, vs. JOHN DOE, in his official capacity, and UNNAMED STATE AGENCY, STATE OF IOWA, Defendants-Appellants. APPEAL FROM THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY THE HONORABLE JUDGE HEATHER LAUBER APPELLANTS’ AMENDED FINAL REPLY BRIEF THOMAS J. MILLER Attorney General of Iowa JEFFREY S. THOMPSON Solicitor General CHRISTOPHER J. DEIST Assistant Attorney General Hoover State Office Building, 2nd Floor Des Moines, Iowa 50319 (515) 281-7204 (515) 281-4902 (fax) ELECTRONICALLY FILED SEP 01, 2020 CLERK OF SUPREME COURT [email protected] [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On the 1st day of September, 2020, the Appellants served Appellants’ Final Reply Brief on all other parties to this appeal by electronic filing: John B. McCormally Chief of Staff / General Counsel Office of the Auditor of State Iowa State Capitol Bldg. Room 111 Des Moines, Iowa 50319 [email protected] ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE _______________________ CHRISTOPHER J. DEIST Assistant Attorney General Hoover State Office Bldg., 2nd Fl. Des Moines, Iowa 50319 (515) 281-7204 [email protected] 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ............................................................... 2 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.................................................................. 4 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ............ 5 ARGUMENT .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the SUPREME COURT of IOWA Supreme Court No. 17-1592
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA Supreme Court No. 17-1592 GREGORY BADLWIN, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. CITY OF ESTHERVILLE, IOWA, MATT REINEKE, Individually and in his Official Capacity as an Officer of the Estherville Police Department, and MATT HELLICKSON, Individually and in his Official Capacity as an Officer of the Estherville Police Department, Defendants-Appellants. CERTIFIED QUESTION FROM THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT THE HONORABLE MARK W. BENNETT, JUDGE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFEDANTS- APPELLANTS THOMAS J. MILLER Attorney General of Iowa JEFFREY S. THOMPSON Solicitor General ([email protected]) JULIA S. KIM ELECTRONICALLY FILED DEC 15, 2017 CLERK OF SUPREME COURT Assistant Attorney General ([email protected]) Hoover State Office Building, 2nd Floor Des Moines, Iowa 50319 ATTORNEYS FOR AMICUS CURIAE 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT REQUIRED BY IOWA R. APP. P. 6.906(4)(d) .............. 5 INTEREST OF THE AMICUS CURIAE ................................................ 5 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………..5 ARGUMENT ......................................................................................... 6 I. Godfrey Decision ........................................................ 6 II. Open Questions Regarding the Application of a Bivens- type-Action in Iowa .......................................................... 7 III. This Court Should Adopt Qualified Immunity ............. 9 A. Bivens and Recognition of Qualified Immunity……9 B. Applying Qualified Immunity to State Constitutional Violations……………………………………………..11
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the Iowa District Court for Polk County State Of
    IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY STATE OF IOWA ex rel. THOMAS J. MILLER, EQUITY No. ______________ ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA, Plaintiff, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; Defendant. FINAL JUDGMENT AND CONSENT DECREE The State of Iowa ex rel. Attorney General Thomas J. Miller, through Assistant Attorney General William R. Pearson, has filed a Complaint for a permanent injunction and other relief in this matter pursuant to the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act, Iowa Code § 714.16 (CFA) and the Personal Information Security Breach Protection Act, Iowa Code § 715C, alleging Defendant, UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (“UBER”) committed violations of Iowa Code §§ 714.16 and 715C. Plaintiff and UBER have agreed to the Court’s entry of this Final Judgment and Consent Decree without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and without admission of any facts alleged or liability of any kind. Preamble The Attorneys General of the states and commonwealths of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii1, Idaho, 1 Hawaii is represented by its Office of Consumer Protection. For simplicity purposes, the entire group will be referred to as the “Attorneys General,” or individually as “Attorney General.” Such designations, however, as they pertain to Hawaii, shall refer to the Executive Director of the State of Hawaii Office of Consumer Protection. 1 Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland2, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska,
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court of Iowa ______
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA _____________________________________________________________ NO. 17-1232 _____________________________________________________________ STATE OF IOWA Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JEREMY M. WERNER Defendant-Appellant. _____________________________________________________________ APPEAL FROM THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR IOWA COUNTY THE HONORABLE MITCHELL E. TURNER, JUDGE _____________________________________________________________ APPELLEE’S BRIEF _____________________________________________________________ THOMAS J. MILLER Attorney General of Iowa DAVID S. GORHAM ROBIN G. FORMAKER Special Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General (515) 239-1711 (515) 239-1465 [email protected] [email protected] Iowa Attorney General’s Office 800 Lincoln Way, Ames, Iowa 50010 FAX (515) 239-1609 ELECTRONICALLY FILED APR 20, 2018 CLERK OF SUPREME COURT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................ 2 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................... 4 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW .................. 7 ROUTING STATEMENT ............................................................................ 11 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ..................................................................... 13 STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................... 14 ARGUMENT ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the SUPREME COURT of IOWA Supreme Court No. 18-1276
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA Supreme Court No. 18-1276 LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS OF IOWA and TAYLOR BLAIR, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. IOWA SECRETARY OF STATE PAUL PATE, Defendant-Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY THE HONORABLE KAREN A. ROMANO, JUDGE APPELLANT’S BRIEF THOMAS J. MILLER Attorney General of Iowa JEFFREY S. THOMPSON Solicitor General of Iowa THOMAS J. OGDEN Assistant Attorney General Hoover State Office Building, 2nd Floor Des Moines, Iowa 50319 (515) 281-5976 (515) 281-4902 (fax) [email protected] ELECTRONICALLY FILED AUG 7, 2018 CLERK OF SUPREME COURT ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PROOF 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.................................................................. 4 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE PRESENTED FOR REVIEW .............. 7 STATEMENT OF THE CASE............................................................... 9 ARGUMENT ....................................................................................... 15 I. The District Court Abused Its Discretion When It Granted LULAC’s Motion for Temporary Injunction. ...... 15 A. The district court’s factual findings do not support a conclusion that LULAC would be irreparably harmed absent an injunction. ................................................................................... 18 1. The 29 day absentee voting period will not irreparably harm LULAC absent the injunction. ....................................... 20 2. The signature matching requirements will not irreparably harm LULAC absent an
    [Show full text]
  • AG Balderas to Congressional Leaders: “Protect the Integrity of Our Elections
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: David Carl July 23, 2018 (505) 288-2465 AG Balderas to Congressional Leaders: “Protect the Integrity of our Elections. Our Democracy Depends on it.” Albuquerque, NM – Today, Attorney General Hector Balderas led a bipartisan coalition of 21 Attorneys General in urging congressional leaders to improve American cyber security and protect the integrity of the upcoming 2018 midterm election, and elections to come, against cyberattacks and infiltrations like the ones committed by Russia in 2016. The latest investigations into that attack shows Russian hackers targeted the American electoral system, stole the private information of hundreds of thousands of people, and infiltrated a company that supplies voting software across the nation, putting the upcoming election at serious risk. These investigations led to the indictment of 12 Russian Intelligence Officers earlier this month. “The intelligence could not be more clear,” said Attorney General Hector Balderas. “In 2016, Russian hackers infiltrated state and local election boards, and stole the sensitive voter information of more than 500,000 Americans. This cannot happen again. It is the vital responsibility of Congressional leaders to safeguard our elections, and prevent yet another dangerous cyber-attack. Nothing short of the fabric of our democracy is at stake.” The coalition of AG’s urged three steps in addressing election security concerns. Prioritizing and acting on election-security legislation. We understand that the Secure Elections Act (S.2261) is before the Senate at this time and may address some of our concerns. Increasing funding for the Election Assistance Commission to support election security improvements at the state level and to protect the personal data of the voters of our states.
    [Show full text]
  • Attorneys General of New York
    ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF NEW YORK, CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, HAWAII, IOWA, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MINNESOTA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW MEXICO, NORTH CAROLINA, OREGON, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT, AND WASHINGTON February 11, 2020 VIA FACSIMILE & REGULAR MAIL The Honorable Mitch McConnell The Honorable Charles E. Schumer Majority Leader Minority Leader United States Senate United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.C. 20515 The Honorable Nancy Pelosi The Honorable Steny Hoyer Speaker of the House Majority Leader United States House of Representatives United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.C. 20515 The Honorable Kevin McCarthy Minority Leader United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Majority Leader McConnell, Minority Leader Schumer, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, and Minority Leader McCarthy, As the Attorneys General of our respective States and District, we write to urge Congress to bring to the floor H.J. Res. 79 and S.J. Res. 6. These bipartisan measures would remove any ratification deadline that may apply to the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) and thus remove any doubt as to its constitutional viability. Neither the Constitution nor the language of the ERA proposed to the states contain a time limit for state ratification. Article V of the Constitution simply states that an amendment “shall be valid . when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states.” Rather than including any date in the ERA’s text, Congress relegated a seven-year deadline to the joint resolution that proposed the ERA and later extended that deadline. When this external time limit expired, the ERA was three states short of full ratification.
    [Show full text]
  • C:\Documents and Settings\CWHITE
    IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR MUSCATINE COUNTY ______________________________________________________________________ _ State of Iowa, ex rel. Gary R. Allison ) as County Attorney for Muscatine ) County, Iowa, ) ) No. EQCV016165 Plaintiff, ) ) BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ) MOTION to DISMISS vs. ) and ) RESISTANCE TO MOTION Thomas J. Vilsack, Governor of ) FOR TEMPORARY ORDER the State of Iowa, 99AG10350 ) ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................2 ARGUMENT..................................................................................................................3 I. MANDAMUS IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE REMEDY TO CHALLENGE EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 42; DISMISSAL LEAVES THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO PROCEED..................................3 A. The County Attorney Cannot Use Mandamus to Challenge the Legality of an Executive Order that Has Been Issued..............................4 B. The Statutory Authority of the County Attorney to Sue in the Name of the “State of Iowa” is Limited to Mandamus .............................6 C. The Standing of the County Attorney to Sue in the “Public Interest” is Limited to Mandamus ................................................7 1 II EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 42 IS CONSISTENT WITH REGULATION OF THE CLEMENCY PROCESS BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY............9 A. The General Assembly Failed to Limit Restoration of Citizenship Rights to a
    [Show full text]
  • COMMONWEALTH of MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, Ss
    COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss. SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION NO. IN THE MATTER OF CITIBANK, N.A.. ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE PURSUANT TO G.L. c. 93A, § 5 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, by and through its Attorney General, Maura Healey, hereby files the Assurance of Discontinuance attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit A pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws chapter 93A, § 5. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL MAURA HEALEY By: _____________________________________ Peter Downing, BBO #675969 Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 Dated: ______February 8, 2021___________ Exhibit A AGREEMENT This Agreement1 is made and entered into as of the 8th day of February 2021 (hereinafter, “Effective Date”) between Citibank, N.A. (“Citi”), and the Investigating States, acting through and by their Attorneys General: Tom Miller (Iowa), Maura Healey (Massachusetts), Gurbir S. Grewal (New Jersey), Josh Stein (North Carolina), and Josh Shapiro (Pennsylvania). This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the Investigating States’ powers under their respective consumer protection laws2 and provides as follows: WHEREAS, the Investigating States conducted a joint investigation of whether Citi failed from February 2011 through August 2017 to reevaluate and reduce the annual percentage rates (“APRs”) for certain consumer credit card accounts consistent with the requirements of the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (CARD Act), Pub. L. No. 111-24,
    [Show full text]