Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ball v. LeBlanc

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided January 31, 2018No. 17-30052Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

STEPHEN A. HIGGINSON, Circuit Judge,, concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I agree with the majority opinion that the injunction should be vacated to the extent it orders the state to maintain the heat index below 88 degrees. However, because, as the majority opinion recognizes, “the rest of the injunction does not exceed the Ball I mandate,” I would affirm it. The relief measures ordered, including IcyBreeze units and diverted cool air, are consistent with the less-intrusive remedies suggested in Ball 1 and extend no further than necessary to correct plaintiffs’ constitutional injury. ’

I…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Hudson v. McMillianSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Rhodes v. ChapmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Helling v. McKinneySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Trop v. DullesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  5. Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API