Strother v. Richardson

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that plaintiff, who was disciplined for Snapchat post, had not shown that “the alleged censorship is ‘great or substantial’ as is required for irreparable harm”
• stating that any assumption that a violation of constitutional rights constitutes irreparable harm “is not absolute” because “the Tenth Circuit has found that ‘[i]t is necessary . . . to consider the specific character of the First Amendment claim.’”
• \The court finds the cases recognizing the distinction between school suspension and participation in an extracurricular activity to be more persuasive given that there is no constitutional right to participate in an extracurricular activity.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).