æÃæü¤ÇéÎåÔÂÌì

Case 1:17-cv-00151-DLH-CSM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA 

AEM vs North Dakota

Link to 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

After a careful review of the entire record, and a careful consideration of all of the Dataphase factors, the Court finds the Dataphase factors, when viewed in their totality, clearly weigh in favor of the issuance of a preliminary injunction. The Plaintiffs have met their burden of establishing the necessity of a preliminary injunction. The law in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals governs, and the Janklow and Branstad decisions lend strong support for the decision to issue a preliminary injunction. Common sense dictates that the law cannot stand constitutional muster because (1) it applies retroactively; (2) it prohibits arbitration clauses in contracts which 24 Case 1:17-cv-00151-DLH-CSM Document 70 Filed 12/14/17 Page 24 of 25 is expressly prohibited and preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, and (3) the law is in direct contradiction of decisions from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Janklow and Branstad involving similar legislation. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction (Docket No. 9) is GRANTED.

To preserve the status quo during the pendency of this case, the State is enjoined from enforcing SB 2289 until further order of the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated this 14th day of December, 2017.

/s/ Daniel L. Hovland Daniel L. Hovland, Chief Judge

United States District Court