Fogel v. Collins

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a “true threat,” an 2 23-55287 expression of an intent to inflict injury on another, is not protected by the First Amendment
• noting that the “remainder of the van displayed innocuous images and phrases, including some with spiritual meaning, created through the artistic endeavors of [the van owner] and his friends”
• noting that the First Amendment \welcomes and protects\ verbal protests against government policy
• noting that the First Amendment “welcomes and protects” verbal protests against government policy
• defining policy for purposes of Monell liability as a “deliberate choice to follow a 17 course of action.”
• characterizing the particularized right at issue as the First Amendment protection enjoyed by an individual in the post-September 11 environment who “satirically proclaim [s] himself or herself to be a terrorist in possession of weapons of mass destruction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).