Jenny Wernsing, Charles Bingaman and Troy Cannon v. Odell Thompson, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that district court erred by assessing too broadly a directive that agency employees not discuss agency matters with outsiders
• noting that when injunctive relief is barred, “a declaratory judgment as a predicate to a damages award can survive” (emphasis added) (quo- tations omitted)
• stating that “injuries compensable in monetary damages can always be redressed by a court judgment”
• noting that the fact that the agency’s mission depends on confidentiality and security was a factor that made it reasonable for the agency head to bar employees from speaking about agency matters without prior approval
• permitting a challenge to an employee pre-clearance directive to proceed, even though the plaintiffs were no longer subject to the challenged policy, because the plaintiffs sought damages
• considering mootness because “not only may the federal courts police subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte, they must” (quoting Hay v. Ind. State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs, 312 F.3d 876, 879 (7th Cir. 2002))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).