Irali v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “there is no immunity defense, whether qualified or absolute, available to the municipality” and that “[djevelopments in federal law over the last 30 years have tied the constitutionality of many types of municipal legislation directly to the purpose and motive of the legislators.”
• arguing the non-binding precedent cited by the County “stand[s] only for the limited proposition that individuals—as opposed to municipalities like the County—may be entitled to legislative immunity from Section 1983 liability for certain legislative actions”
• municipality could be held liable where, allegedly in retaliation for protected speech, the positions of supernumerary police officers were eliminated through a budgetary resolution
• municipality could be held liable where, allegedly in retaliation for protected speech, the positions of supernumerary police officers were eliminated through a budgetary resolution
• municipality could be held liable where retaliatory action took place through a budget resolution

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).