My motion for an expedited briefing schedule for the appeal discusses some of the issues overlooked by the appeals court in its denial of my motion for an injunction pending appeal.

Like the District Court, this panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals declined to address the merits of my First Amendment and due process claims and instead focused on whether it makes sense for federal courts to abstain from hearing my constitutional challenges out of respect for the University as a state actor. Unfortunately, the…

The university’s response to my motion to the court of appeals for a ruling on my motion for an injunction pending appeal didn’t break much new ground. In reply I pointed out the many ways in which the university had failed to meet its burden on my First Amendment claims.

My motion to the court of appeals to rule on my motion for an injunction pending appeal elicited some procedural objections from the AG, which I countered here.

The University also responded to my motion for an injunction pending appeal. Here is my reply.

As part of my lawsuit, I asked the Kentucky Attorney General to stop enforcing a Kentucky law that requires Kentucky’s public universities to tar principled opposition to the colonization, apartheid, and genocide of Palestine as “antisemitism”. All Kentuckians have a First Amendment right to oppose Israel. The Attorney General filed a brief in the U.S.…

Ten days after I motioned for an injunction pending appeal, I filed a motion for the court of appeals to issue a ruling on the motion.

The District Court having refused to reinstate me pending my appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, I now ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to reinstate me pending my appeal.

The District Court said it would abstain from considering whether it had made a mistake in abstaining.

I’m appealing. I motioned to be reinstated while the appeal is pending.