Documents in Mirabelli v. Olson
Court documents in the archive for this case, each with the description the archive holds and a link to the original where there is one. Documents are listed by docket entry; an attachment sits under its entry, marked with the entry number and its own number (12-3 is the third attachment to entry 12). 210 documents.
| Entry | Date | Document | Pages | Open |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33 | ORDER FILED. Mary H. MURGUIA, Andrew D. HURWITZ, Salvador MENDOZA, Jr. On March 3, 2026, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs-Appellees’ (“Plaintiffs”) application to vacate the stay in Mirabelli v. Bonta, No. 25A810, 607 U.S. ___ (2026), 2026 WL 575049 (U.S. Mar. 2, 2026), the court issued an order vacating in part the stay entered by this court on January 5, 2026. See Dkt. No. 19. The court confirmed that the stay is vacated as to the parents’ claims and remains in effect as to the remaining claims. Id. On March 6, 2026, Defendants-Appellants (“Defendants”) filed an opposed emergency motion for modification of the stay order. Dkt. No. 24. Defendants request the court to modify its stay order in two respects: (1) confirm that the permanent injunction is stayed insofar as it would compel disclosure “to parents who would engage in abuse,” id. at 4–5; and (2) confirm that the notice requirement set out in Item 3 of the permanent injunction is stayed pending appeal, or substitute the notice requirement statement, id. at 5–7. Plaintiffs-Appellees oppose the modifications and argue that the proper venue would be the district court in the first instance. Dkt. No. 26. Defendants raise important concerns, particularly regarding whether the injunction would compel disclosure “to parents who would engage in abuse.” However, we agree with Plaintiffs that the district court should address the request to modify its injunction in the first instance. The district court retains jurisdiction to modify its injunction during the pendency of the appeal. Hoffman ex rel. NLRB v. Beer Drivers & Salesmen’s Loc. Union No. 888, 536 F.2d 1268, 1276 (9th Cir. 1976) (“[I]n the case of an appeal from an order granting an injunction, the district court does not lose jurisdiction to alter the injunction.”). Defendants’ motion for modification of the stay order is DENIED without prejudice. Dkt. No. 24. [Entered: 03/17/2026 11:32 AM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 2 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 42 | ORDER FILED. Mary H. MURGUIA, Andrew D. HURWITZ, Salvador MENDOZA, Jr. In light of Appellants’ supplement to the motion to consolidate (Doc. 38), it has come to the court’s attention that there was an error in the court’s April 20, 2026 order (Doc. 37). The court’s April 20, 2026 order is vacated. Appellants’ motion to consolidate appeal nos. 25-8056 and 26-2337 is granted. The parties shall address both appeals in the same set of briefs according to the principal briefing schedule currently in place for appeal no. 25-8056. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 04/21/2026 04:33 PM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 1 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 45 | OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Rob Bonta, Appellant Tony Thurmond, Appellant Linda Darling-Hammond, Appellant Cynthia Glover Woods, Appellant Francisco Escobedo, Appellant Brenda Lewis, Appellant James J. McQuillen, Appellant Sharon Olken, Appellant Gabriela Orozco-Gonzalez, Appellant Kim Pattillo Brownson, Appellant Haydee Rodriguez, Appellant Alison Yoshimoto-Towery, Appellant Anya Ayyappan. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 05/26/2026 12:24 PM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 70 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 51 | AMICUS BRIEF by government or with consent submitted for filing by Legal History and Family Law Scholars in Support of Neither Party. [25-8056, 26-2337]--[COURT UPDATE: Corrected PDF attached as of 6/2/2026, REPLACING original attachment] [Entered: 06/02/2026 01:25 PM] [Edited: 06/02/2026 04:31 PM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 38 | ||
| 56 | AMICUS BRIEF by government or with consent submitted for filing by Professors of Psychology & Human Development. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 06/02/2026 04:13 PM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 35 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 62 | AMICUS BRIEF by government or with consent submitted for filing by Lambda Legal Defense & Education Fund, Public Advocates, GLAD Law, Glisten, RPYA, et al.. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 06/02/2026 05:12 PM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 43 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 69 | ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellee Elizabeth Mirabelli, Appellee Lori Ann West, Appellee Jane Roe, Appellee Jane Boe, Appellee John Poe, Appellee Jane Poe, Appellee John Doe, Appellee Jane Doe. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 08/26/2026 07:33 PM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 76 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 72-1 | AMICUS BRIEF by government or with consent submitted for filing by Dr. Jennifer Bauwens. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 08/27/2026 09:54 AM]Brief · Docket 25-8056 | 50 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 82 | AMICUS BRIEF by government or with consent submitted for filing by States of Florida and Idaho and 15 other states in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 09/02/2026 06:34 AM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 24 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external | |
| 108 | REPLY BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Rob Bonta, Appellant Tony Thurmond, Appellant Linda Darling-Hammond, Appellant Cynthia Glover Woods, Appellant Francisco Escobedo, Appellant Brenda Lewis, Appellant James J. McQuillen, Appellant Sharon Olken, Appellant Gabriela Orozco-Gonzalez, Appellant Kim Pattillo Brownson, Appellant Haydee Rodriguez, Appellant Alison Yoshimoto-Towery, Appellant Anya Ayyappan. [25-8056, 26-2337] [Entered: 10/16/2026 01:28 PM]Filing · Docket 25-8056 | 38 | View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external |