Powell v. Ryan, No. 16-1190 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the denial of plaintiff's request for a broader preliminary injunction against the enforcement of rules of the Iowa State Fair that forbid impeding traffic and bringing signs attached to poles and sticks to the Fair. The Eighth Circuit concluded that, whatever level of precision might be required for Fair rules to satisfy due process, plaintiff was not likely to succeed on his claim; a person of ordinary intelligence in plaintiff's position was on fair notice; plaintiff was well informed that carrying a sign on a pole violates a rule against carrying signs attached to sticks or poles; plaintiff was not likely to succeed on a claim that the Fair's rules impermissibly encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement because he failed to present evidence demonstrating that the Fair authorities have discriminated in favor of others who are similarly situated to him; that the rules were unwritten does not deprive plaintiff of fair notice prospectively; and plaintiff failed to show that he was likely to suffer irreparable harm.
Court Description: Colloton, Auther, with Melloy and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Civil Case - preliminary injunction - due process. Following this court's remand in Powell v. Noble, 798 F.3d 690 (8th Cir. 2015), for the district court to consider a due process claim relating to Powell's efforts to hold a sign on a pole at the Iowa State Fair, the district court's denied a broader preliminary injunction, concluding Powell was unlikely to succeed on the merit and failed to show irreparable harm. On appeal, Powell claims the unwritten Fair rules are too vague. Whatever level of precision is required where the only sanction is ejection, Powell is not likely to succeed on his due process claim; Powell had notice of the rules for prospective relief and the rules are clear. Powell is not likely to succeed in claim that rule impermissibly encourages arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement and has not shown authorities discriminated in favor of others similarly situated. Fact that rules are unwritten does not deprive Powell of fair notice prospectively. District court's determination that Powell failed to show he was likely to suffer irreparable injury is affirmed; enforcement is not likely to infringe on his right to freedom of speech. Judge Shepherd concurs.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.