Episode 4: Gonzalez v. Trevino
Description
Sylvia Gonzalez v.Edward Trevino, II, et al., argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on March 20, 2024.
From the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari:
In Nieves v. Bartlett, this Court held that probable cause does not bar a retaliatory arrest claim against a “police officer” when a plaintiff shows “that he was arrested when otherwise similarly situated individuals not engaged in the same sort of protected speech had not been.”***Here, a 72-year-old councilwoman organized a petition criticizing a city manager, and unwittingly placed it in her binder during a council meeting. Two months later, respondents—the city manager’s allies—engineered her arrest for tampering with a government record. That charge has no precedent involving similar conduct, was supported by an affidavit based on the councilwoman’s viewpoints, and skirted ordinary procedures to ensure her jailing. The councilwoman sued respondents but no arresting officer.
Questions Presented:
Whether the Nieves probable cause exception can be satisfied by objective evidence other than specific examples of arrests that never happened.
Whether the Nieves probable cause rule is limited to individual claims against arresting officers for split-second arrests.
Resources:
Gonzalez v. Trevino docket
Institute for Free Speech Gonzalez v. Trevino amicus brief
Nieves v. Bartlett opinion (2019)
Time Stamps:
(00:00:06) Anya A. Bidwell, Institute for Justice, Counsel of Record for Sylvia Gonzalez
(00:30:00) Nicole F. Reaves, Assistant to the Solicitor General
(00:57:00) Lisa S. Blatt, Counsel of Record for Edward Trevino, et al.
(01:07:40) Justice Gorsuch asks about viewpoint discrimination in enforcement of statutes and the First Amendment
(01:15:45) Justice Kagan asks a hypothetical about objective evidence of officers retaliating over viewpoint
(01:23:40) Rebuttal by Anya A. Bidwell
The Institute for Free Speech promotes and defends the political speech rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government guaranteed by the First Amendment. Learn more on our website: www.ifs.org
Episode 21: Bristol Myers Squibb Co v. Secretary United States Department of HHS
Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Secretary United States Department of HHS, consolidated under AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP et al v. Secretary United States Department of HHS, argued before Circuit Judges Thomas M....
Published 10/31/24
Episode 20: Moms for Liberty v. Wilson County Board of Education
Moms for Liberty – Wilson County, TN, et al. v. Wilson County Board of Education, et al., argued before Circuit Judges Jane Branstetter Stranch, Amul R. Thapar, and Eric E. Murphy in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit...
Published 10/29/24