IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE …

1 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE southern DISTRICT OF TEXAS BROWNSVILLE DIVISION STATE OF TEXAS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 1:18-CV-68 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants, and KARLA PEREZ, MARIA ROCHA, JOSE MAGA A-SALGADO, NANCI J. PALACIOS GODINEZ, ELLY MARISOL ESTRADA, KARINA RUIZ DE DIAZ, CARLOS AGUILAR GONZALEZ, KARLA LOPEZ, LUIS A. RAFAEL, DARWIN VELASQUEZ, JIN PARK, OSCAR ALVAREZ, NANCY ADOSSI, DENISE ROMERO, PRATISHTHA KHANNA, JUNG WOO KIM, ANGEL SILVA, MOSES KAMAU CHEGE, HYO-WON JEON, ELIZABETH DIAZ, MARIA DIAZ, and BLANCA GONZALEZ, Proposed Defendant- Intervenors.

2 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE Proposed Defendant-Int erve nors Karla Perez, Maria Rocha, Jose, Maga a-Salgado, Nanci J. Palacios Godinez, Elly Marisol Estrada, Karina Ruiz De Diaz, Carlos Aguilar Gonzalez, Karla Lopez, Luis A. Rafael, Darwin Velasquez, Jin Park, Oscar Alvarez, Nancy Adossi, Denise Romero, Pratishtha Khanna, Jung Woo Kim, Angel Silva, Moses Kamau Chege, Hyo-Won Jeon, Elizabeth Diaz, Maria Diaz, and Blanca Gonzalez (collectively, Proposed Defendant -Case 1:18-cv-00068 Document 13 Filed in TXSD on 05/08/18 Page 1 of 32 Interve nors ), respectfully request that the COURT grant them leave to intervene as defendants in this action as of right pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) or, in the alternative, grant them permissive intervention pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(b)(1)(B).

3 In support of this Motion, Proposed Defendant-Intervenors rely on and incorporate herein their Memorandum of Law in Support, filed with the COURT today, and its accompanying appendices and exhibits, and Proposed Defendant-Intervenors Answer to the Complaint, attached as Exhibit 1 to this Motion, to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(c). Dated: May 8, 2018 Respectfully submitted, MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND By: /s/ Nina Perales Nina Perales (Tex. Bar No. 24005046); (SD of Tex. Bar No. 21127) Attorney-in-Charge Celina Moreno (Tex. Bar No. 24074754) (SD of Tex.)

4 Bar No. 2867694) Jack Salmon (Tex. Bar No. 24068914) (SD of Texas Bar No. 1130532) Alejandra vila (Tex. Bar No. 24089252) (SD of Tex. Bar No. 2677912) 110 Broadway, Suite 300 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Phone: (210) 224-5476 Facsimile: (210) 224-5382 Email: GARC A & GARC A, ATTORNEYS AT LAW Carlos Moctezuma Garc a (Tex. Bar No. 24065265) (SD of Tex. Bar No. 1081768) Box 4545 McAllen, TX 78502 Phone: (956) 630-3889 Facsimile: (956) 630-3899 Email: Case 1:18-cv-00068 Document 13 Filed in TXSD on 05/08/18 Page 2 of 33 Attorneys for Proposed Defendant- Intervenors CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE I, the undersigned, hereby certify that on May 7, 2018, I conferred with Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding this motion.

5 Plaintiffs advised that they do not oppose the motion to intervene. Defendants did not provide a position but responded to the request to confer on May 7, 2018, as follows: Defendants will review your motion to intervene, and respond as appropriate. /s/ Nina Perales Nina Perales CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, hereby certify that, on the eighth day of May, 2018, I electronically filed the above and foregoing document using the CM/ECF system, which automatically sends notice and a copy of the filing to all counsel of record. /s/ Nina Perales Nina Perales Case 1:18-cv-00068 Document 13 Filed in TXSD on 05/08/18 Page 3 of 3IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE southern DISTRICT OF TEXAS BROWNSVILLE DIVISION STATE OF TEXAS, et al.

6 , Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 1:18-CV-68 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants, and KARLA PEREZ, MARIA ROCHA, JOSE MAGA A-SALGADO, NANCI J. PALACIOS GODINEZ, ELLY MARISOL ESTRADA, KARINA RUIZ DE DIAZ, CARLOS AGUILAR GONZALEZ, KARLA LOPEZ, LUIS A. RAFAEL, DARWIN VELASQUEZ, JIN PARK, OSCAR ALVAREZ, NANCY ADOSSI, DENISE ROMERO, PRATISHTHA KHANNA, JUNG WOO KIM, ANGEL SILVA, MOSES KAMAU CHEGE, HYO-WON JEON, ELIZABETH DIAZ, MARIA DIAZ, and BLANCA GONZALEZ, Proposed Defendant- Intervenors. PROPOSED DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE Case 1:18-cv-00068 Document 14 Filed in TXSD on 05/08/18 Page 1 of 25 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I.

7 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES TO BE RULED UPON BY THE COURT .. 1 II. STATEMENT OF THE NATURE AND STAGE OF THE 2 III. SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT .. 7 IV. THE PROPOSED DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS ARE ENTITLED TO INTERVENTION AS OF RIGHT .. 8 A. The Proposed Defendant-Intervenors Motion to Intervene Is Timely .. 8 B. The Proposed Defendant-Intervenors Possess a Protectable Interest .. 11 C. The Proposed Defendant-Intervenors Interests Would Be Subject to Impairment If Intervention Were Denied .. 13 D. The Proposed Defendant-Intervenors Interests Cannot Be Adequately Represented by the Existing Parties .. 14 V.

8 PERMISSIVE INTERVENTION IS ALSO APPROPRIATE .. 18 VI. CONCLUSION .. 19 Case 1:18-cv-00068 Document 14 Filed in TXSD on 05/08/18 Page 2 of 25 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Arpaio v. Obama, Page(s) No. 14-cv-1966, slip op. at 5 ( Dec. 23, 2014) .. 3 Black Fire Fighters Ass n of Dallas v. City of Dallas, 19 992 (5th Cir. 1994) .. 12, 14 Ceres Gulf v. Cooper, 957 1199 (5th Cir. 1992) .. 9, 14 Chiles v. Thornburgh, 865 1197 (11th Cir. 1989) .. 12, 14 Day v. Sebelius, 227 668 (D. Kan. 2005)..12, 17 Decker v. UNITED STATES Dep t of Labor, 473 F. Supp. 770 ( Wis.)

9 1979) .. 13 Diaz v. S. Drilling Corp., 427 1118 (5th Cir. 1970) ..11 Dimond v. DISTRICT of Columbia, 792 179 ( Cir. 1986) ..15 Edwards v. City of Houston, 78 983 (5th Cir. 1996) .. 8, 10, 15 Ford v. City of Hunstville, 242 235 (5th Cir. 2001) .. 9 Forest Conservation Council v. Forest Serv., 66 1489 (9th Cir. 1995), rev d on other grounds by Wilderness Soc y v. Forest Serv., 630 1173 (9th Cir. 2011) .. 14, 15 Gen. Tel. Co. of the Nw., Inc. v. EEOC, 446 318 (1980) .. 15 Grutter v. Bollinger, 188 394 (6th Cir. 1999) .. 13, 14 In re Lease Oil Antitrust Litig., 570 244 (5th Cir.

10 2009) .. 9, 10 John Doe No. 1 v. Glickman, 256 371 (5th Cir. 2001) .. 8 Case 1:18-cv-00068 Document 14 Filed in TXSD on 05/08/18 Page 3 of 25 iii Lewis v. Stark, 312 F. Supp. 197 ( Cal. 1968), rev d on other grounds by Lewis v. Martin, 397 552 (1980) .. 12 Martin v. Travelers Indem. Co., 450 542 (5th Cir. 1971) .. 14 Mich. State AFL-CIO v. Miller, 103 1240 (6th Cir. 1997) .. 13 Natural Res. Def. Council v. Costle, 561 904 ( Cir. 1977) .. 12 Ross v. Marshall, 426 745 (5th Cir. 2005) .. 11 Saldano v. Roach, 363 545 (5th Cir. 2004) .. 8 Sierra Club v. Espy, 18 1202 (5th Cir.