Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Center for Medical Progress

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 PLANNED PARENTHOOD Case No. 16-cv-00236-WHO FEDERATION OF AMERICA, INC., et al., 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER ON PRETRIAL MOTIONS 9 v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 740, 754, 758, 761, 762, 764, 10 CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS, et 789 11 al., Defendants. 12 13 On September 9, 2019, I heard argument on the parties’ motions in limine, motions to 14 exclude, and disputed legal issues. A few overarching issues will be addressed first, to provide 15 necessary context and explanation for the specific rulings laid out below. 16 Journalism vs. a Smear Campaign. These are the dueling narratives of this case. 17 Defendants argue that they were involved in traditional under-cover journalism in order to expose 18 violations of the law by Planned Parenthood with respect to PPFA and its affiliates’ fetal tissue 19 transfer programs. Plaintiffs argue that the goal of defendants’ Human Capital Project (HCP) was 20 to smear plaintiffs with allegations they profited from the fetal tissue transfer programs in order to 21 …