Lopez
Lopez v. Merced County, Cal.
Opinion
Opinion
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW RE: PLAINTIFFS’ APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
I. INTRODUCTION
This case comes before a three-judge court, under § 5 of the Voting Rights Act (“VRA”). 42 U.S.C. § 1973c (“Section 5”). Plaintiffs challenge numerous annexations, detachments, consolidations and/or formations to cities and special districts in the County of Merced, California, adopted since November 1, 1972. On November 21, 2006, Circuit Judge Jay S. Bybee and District Judges Oliver W. Wanger and Anthony W. Ishii, appointed to the three-judge panel by the Chief Judge of the Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284 , heard Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 19), seeking to enjoin the certification of the November 7, 2006 election results in certain defendant jurisdictions.
Due to the proximity of the scheduled city council meetings at which the November 7, 2006 results were to be certified and newly-elected municipal officers sworn-in, the Court announced an oral statement of decision which denied the motion for preliminary injunction. The parties were invited to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. (See Docs. 67 & 76.) Having…