Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Leigh v. Salazar
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 16, 2012No. 11-16088Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWallace, Senior Circuit Judge
Judge Smith has crafted an excellent opinion and I agree with nearly all of it. I agree that Leigh’s request for preliminary injunctive relief is not moot. I also agree that Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, 478 U.S. 1, 106 S.Ct. 2785, 92 L.Ed.2d 1 (1986) (Press-Enterprise II), provides the proper test for Leigh’s claims that she was denied access to horse gathers and horse holding facilities in violation of her First Amendment rights. I disagree, however, that the district court’s error in failing to apply Press-Enterprise II requires us to reverse and remand.
As Judge Smith correctly…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., County of RiversideSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western NYSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Sports Form, Inc., a Nevada Corporation v. United Press International, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Stanley v. University of Southern CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.