[I’m a little behind on the docket due to the holidays and a few competing deadlines. As I catch up, many of the docket entries will be more abbreviated.]
This is another First Amendment case, wrapped in a separate doctrine. Here, Oliver was convicted of violating a local time/place/manner restriction that affected where he could engage in religious pamphleteering. After conviction, he brought a civil rights claim under Section 1983, arguing that the local law violated the first amendment. That claim ran into a Supreme Court precedent, Heck v. Humphrey, which limits the ability of convicted criminals to challenge the law they were convicted under.
The district court held that Heck barred his 1983 claim, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed that decision. Oliver now wants the Court to read Heck narrowly. All he wants is a declaration and injunction with respect to the local law, not to overturn his conviction—that should be compatible with the motivating concerns of Heck, he contends. The federal government sided with Oliver, at least with respect to claims brought by those not currently in custody.
The model confidently predicts the Court to side with Oliver, reversing the Fifth Circuit. The most likely dissenter is Alito, who raised more concerns than most about forward-going relief.
vote predictions
