Brach v. Newsom

• Docket Number: 20-56291
• Decision Date: 08 December 2021
• Parties: MATTHEW BRACH, an individual; JESSE PETRILLA, an individual; LACEE BEAULIEU, an individual; ERICA SEPHTON, an individual; KENNETH FLEMING, an individual; JOHN ZIEGLER, an individual; ALISON WALSH, an individual; ROGER HACKETT, an individual; CHRISTINE RUIZ, an individual; Z. R., a minor; ADE ONIBOKUN, an individual; BRIAN HAWKINS, an individual; TIFFANY MITROWKE, an individual; MARIANNA BEMA; ASHLEY RAMIREZ, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. GAVIN NEWSOM, in his official capacity as the Governor of California; ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of California; TOMAS ARAGON, in his official capacity as the State Public Health Officer and Department of Public Health Director; TONY THURMOND, in his official capacity as State Superintendent of Public Instruction and Director of Education, Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)

1

MATTHEW BRACH, an individual; JESSE PETRILLA, an individual; LACEE BEAULIEU, an individual; ERICA SEPHTON, an individual; KENNETH FLEMING, an individual; JOHN ZIEGLER, an individual; ALISON WALSH, an individual; ROGER HACKETT, an individual; CHRISTINE RUIZ, an individual; Z. R., a minor; ADE ONIBOKUN, an individual; BRIAN HAWKINS, an individual; TIFFANY MITROWKE, an individual; MARIANNA BEMA; ASHLEY RAMIREZ, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. GAVIN NEWSOM, in his official capacity as the Governor of California; ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of California; TOMAS ARAGON, in his official capacity as the State Public Health Officer and Department of Public Health Director; TONY THURMOND, in his official capacity as State Superintendent of Public Instruction and Director of Education, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 20-56291

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

December 8, 2021

Central District of California, Los Angeles D.C. No. 2:20-cv-06472-SVW-AFM

ORDER 2

MURGUIA, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) and Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion is vacated.