695 F.3d 617
7th Cir.2012Background
- Village of Palatine seeks a stay of this court’s mandate pending certiorari; the district court remanded on whether disclosed information fell within DPPA exemptions and potential damages remain undecided; the en banc court reversed dismissal, holding plausible DPPA violation and remand needed on exemptions and damages; stay standards require a reasonable probability of four Justices to grant certiorari and five to reverse, plus irreparable injury; the DPPA’s reach and Commerce Clause basis were argued but the issue was not clearly presented for Supreme Court review; the Village claims minimal burden in modifying police disclosure practices but the court finds no irreparable harm and the lack of a monetary judgment diminishes urgency; the author denies the stay request.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a stay of mandate should be granted pending certiorari | Village argues substantial certiorari question and irreparable harm | Senne argues no sufficient likelihood of certiorari or irreparable harm | Denied stay |
| Whether the Village’s Commerce Clause argument on DPPA exceeds Congress’s authority | Village contends DPPA exceeds authority if limited to sales | Court’s opinion already addressed narrow effect; argument not properly raised | Not decided as basis for stay; not persuasive here |
| Whether the modification of disclosure practices constitutes irreparable injury | Modification imposes burden on law enforcement | No significant burden; irreparable harm not shown | No irreparable injury shown; stay denied on this ground |
Key Cases Cited
- Books v. City of Elkhart, 239 F.3d 826 (7th Cir. 2001) (stay standard requiring probability and irreparable injury)
- Bricklayers Local 21 of Illinois Apprenticeship & Training Program v. Banner Restoration, Inc., 384 F.3d 911 (7th Cir. 2004) (stay requires probability of success on merits and irreparable harm)
- Galdikas v. Fagan, 347 F.3d 625 (7th Cir. 2003) (standard for stay and certiorari considerations)
- Williams v. Chrans, 50 F.3d 1358 (7th Cir. 1995) (approval of stay framework and material factors)
- California v. American Stores Co., 492 U.S. 130 (1989) (four-justice and five-justice standard for certiorari)
- United States v. Warner, 507 F.3d 508 (7th Cir. 2007) (applies stay standards to certiorari petitions)
- Reno v. Condon, 528 U.S. 141 (2000) (DPPA interstate commerce basis discussed)
- Nat’l Fed’n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012) (commerce power limits discussed)