Opinion
Civil Action 97-D-1396-N
May 26, 2000
Dennis R. Bailey, for Movant.
Jack M. Curtis, Billington M. Garrett, Attorneys for Plaintiff.
Leura J. Garrett, Vincent M. Garvey, Frank W. Hunger, Gail F. Levine, Attorneys for Defendant.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
[In re: Bill Pryor. etc., et al. v. Janet Reno, etc., et al, No. 98-6261 (11th Cir. May 11, 2000)]
Before the court is the Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, as above captioned, entered May 11, 2000, and received and filed by the clerk of this court on May 15, 2000, as mandate, wherein the Eleventh Circuit vacated the judgment of the district court in the above-referenced action and remanded this action for further consideration in light ofReno v. Condon, 528 U.S. ___ (2000).
Based on the Supreme Court's holding in Reno v. Condon, 528 U.S. ___ (2000), that the Driver's Privacy Protection Act does not "run afoul of the federalism principles enunciated in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144, 112 S.Ct. 2408, 120 L.Ed.2d 120 (1992), and Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898, 117 S.Ct. 2365, 138 L.Ed.2d 914 (1997)," it is CONSIDERED, ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Permanent Injunction issued by this court on June 22, 1999, be and the same is hereby VACATED and that
JUDGMENT be and the same is hereby ENTERED in favor of Defendants Janet Reno, Attorney General of the United States, and the United States of America and against Plaintiffs Bill Pryor, Attorney General for the State of Alabama, and the State of Alabama.
It is Further CONSIDERED and ORDERED that all costs herein incurred be and the same are hereby taxed against plaintiffs-appellants, for which let execution issue.
DONE this the 26th day of May, 2000.