Anas Elhady v. Charles Kable, IV

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that the court “need not address plaintiffs’ claims as to the adequacy of existing processes[]” when plaintiffs fail to demonstrate infringement of constitutional interests
• noting that “framing” is “important”
• “We find these decisions persuasive and decline the invitation to create a circuit split.”
• “We find these decisions persuasive and decline the invitation to create a circuit split.”
• “Because we conclude that plaintiffs have not demonstrated infringements of constitutional liberty interests under the Due Process Clause, we need not address plaintiffs’ claims as to the adequacy of existing processes.”
• “The federal government’s intragovernmental dissemination of TSDB information to other federal agencies and components, to be used for federal law enforcement purposes, is not ‘public disclosure’ for purposes of a stigma-plus claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).