Opinion
Civil Action 22-211-SDD-SDJ 22-214-SDD-SDJ
08-29-2023
PRESS ROBINSON, et al v. KYLE ARDOIN, in his official capacity as Secretary of State for Louisian EDWARD GALMON, SR., et al v. KYLE ARDOIN, in his official capacity as Secretary of State for Louisiana
RULING
SHELLY D. DICK CHIEF JUDGE
This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Cancel Hearing on Remedy and to Enter a Scheduling Order for Trial filed by Defendant, Louisiana Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin, and the Intervenor Defendants, Senate President Page Cortez, Speaker Clay Schexnayder, and Attorney General Jeff Landry. The Galmon and Robinson Plaintiffs filed a joint Opposition, and the Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus separately opposed the Motion. For the reasons that follow, the Motion is DENIED.
Rec. Doc. No. 260.
Rec. Doc. No. 264.
Rec. Doc. No. 263.
This case has been extensively litigated. The parties have conducted expansive discovery, presented testimony from twenty-one witnesses, introduced hundreds of exhibits into evidence throughout a five-day preliminary injunction hearing, and filed hundreds of pages of pre- and post-hearing briefing-all of which culminated in this Court's 152-page Ruling on liability. On the eve of the remedial hearing, this matter was stayed by the United States Supreme Court. The preparation necessary for the remedial hearing was essentially complete. The parties were ordered to submit proposed remedial maps. The Defendants elected not to prepare any remedial maps. The Plaintiffs disclosed proposed remedial maps; witnesses and exhibits were disclosed; expert reports were disclosed; and Defendants deposed Plaintiffs' identified experts. The only remaining issue is the selection of a congressional district map-a limited inquiry-which has been the subject of disclosure and discovery in the run up to the June 29, 2022 remedy hearing that was stayed on the eve of trial.
Rec. Doc. No. 173.
Rec. Doc. No. 227.
See Rec. Doc. No. 206.
The Court finds that based on the remaining issue before it, there is adequate time to update the discovery needed in advance of the hearing to take place October 3-5, 2023. The parties were previously ordered to confer and jointly submit a proposed pre-hearing scheduling order in advance of the October 3, 2023 hearing date but have failed to reach an agreement. Accordingly, the Court will refer this matter to the Magistrate Judge on an expedited basis for the entry of a scheduling order.
Rec. Doc. No. 250.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Cancel Hearing on Remedy and to Enter a Scheduling Order for Trial is DENIED. The matter is hereby referred to the Magistrate Judge for an expedited entry of a Scheduling Order.
Rec. Doc. No. 260.