Filed on Monday. For our purposes:
• Naming FIU is a mistake, a waste of time, or belt-and-suspenders caution. Naming Pres. Nunez in her official capacity gets to EpY. Naming her in her individual capacity enables a damages claim. Since he did not name any other individuals, the theory must be that the president made all relevant decisions in ordering the investigation and thus "caused' the violation. Otherwise, plaintiff probably needs to name the other defendants involved in the investigation and the decision to investigate the speech.
• He will have a hard time overcoming qualified immunity to get those damages. There is almost certainly no factually similar precedent. Nor is this obvious. In fact, a recent Eleventh Circuit order in a case involving antisemitic speech by a UF lawsuit went the other way.
• Note how little time the case will spend in the district court. He will likely seek a preliminary injunction in the coming weeks; the grant or denial will be appealable (and will be appealed), putting the case in the 11th Circuit within a matter of weeks.
Stay tuned.
