From yesterday’s opinion in the case formerly known as A.A.R.P. v. Trump, but now W.M.M. v. Trump:
The AARP, a nonprofit entirely unrelated to this case, seek leave to intervene to request that the petitioner A.A.R.P.’s pseudonym be changed to A.R.P. and that the case caption be styled as W.M.M., et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et. al. The petitioners and the respondents do not oppose the AARP’s motion….
The Court construes the motion to intervene as an agreement by the existing parties to amend the styling of the case caption. Accordingly, the Court amends its prior order granting the motion to proceed under pseudonyms and orders that the petitioners are permitted to proceed under the pseudonyms A.R.P., W.M.M., and F.G.M. [not to be confused with FGM -EV]. In addition, the Court orders that this case will hereafter proceed under the case caption W.M.M., et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et. al.
Well, that clears that up! The heart of the argument in the motion itself was:
Unsurprisingly, this litigation has already received attention from the press and social media. It will surely continue to do so. AARP is concerned that the nomenclature adopted by the caption of this case will create substantial confusion among journalists and the public. Indeed, in the 72 hours since the litigation was filed, it has already resulted in numerous misplaced inquiries to AARP. Both the ACLU and AARP are prominent advocacy organizations on federal policies, albeit in very different domains.
For more on the question If Pseudonyms, Then What Kind?, see this article; when I was writing it, I wasn’t thinking about the litigant’s initials vs. organizational name problem, but here’s a related problem from a 1996 Ninth Circuit case:
The plaintiffs in this case previously were denominated “James Rowe, Jane Rowe and John Doe.” One of the many persons genuinely named “James Rowe” wrote to the court while the appeal was pending, and said that his reputation was harmed by a newspaper story about the appeal, because careless readers might think erroneously that he is a convicted sex offender…. It is preferable for lawyers and courts to avoid harm to the reputations of real persons by using … traditional references for pseudonyms.
Thanks to Paul Alan Levy for the pointer.
