Brandon Kittle-Aikeley v. Donald Claycomb
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
1DissentBye, Circuit Judge
I would affirm the district court’s order granting the Appellees (hereinafter “students”) a permanent injunction from Appellants’ (hereinafter “Linn State”) suspi-cionless drug-testing policy for all but five of Linn State’s academic programs because the district court’s program-by-program analysis is correct and Linn State failed to present sufficient evidence demonstrating a special need for drug testing. Based on the evidence presented, the district court did not abuse its discretion. I therefore respectfully dissent.
I
The district court did not abuse its discretion by conducting a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Vernonia School District 47J v. ActonSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican PartySupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- National Treasury Employees Union v. Von RaabSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Chandler v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Ferguson v. City of CharlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.