Saved Magazine v. Spokane Police Department’, No. 20-36073 (9th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Spokane Public Library hosted a children’s event called “Drag Queen Story Hour.” Because the event proved controversial, police separated 150 protesters and 300 counterprotesters into separate zones near the library. Yaghtin arrived at the event wearing a press badge and identified himself as a member of the press. Yaghtin alleges he was assigned a police “detail” to accompany him through a crowd of counterprotesters out of concern that he was “fake press.” While walking through the counterprotest zone, Yaghtin began speaking with a counterprotester, who asked him whether he was the person that had advocated for the execution of gay people. Officer Doe interrupted the exchange, and escorted Yaghtin through the counterprotest zone.
Affirming the dismissal of a suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, the Ninth Circuit held that Doe was entitled to qualified immunity. The plaintiffs did not challenge the ordinance or permit scheme, nor the police department’s use of separate protest zones. No precedent would have alerted Doe that his enforcement would violate clearly established First Amendment law; it was not unreasonable for Doe to believe that it was lawful for him to examine the substance of Yaghtin’s speech to enforce the separate protest zone policy. The city cannot be held liable because nothing in the complaint plausibly alleged a policy, custom, or practice leading to any violation. Plaintiffs’ allegations amounted to only an “isolated or sporadic incident” that could not form the basis of liability under “Monell.”
Court Description: Civil Rights. The panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Afshin Yaghtin and Saved Magazine alleging that Spokane police officers violated plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights when they prevented Yaghtin, acting as a journalist at a public event, from “engaging in dialogue with a protester” under threat of arrest. In June 2019, the Spokane Public Library hosted a children’s book reading event called “Drag Queen Story Hour.” Because the library event proved controversial, the police separated 150 protesters and 300 counterprotesters SAVED MAGAZINE V. SPOKANE POLICE DEP’T 3 into separate protest and counterprotest zones near the library. Yaghtin arrived at the event wearing a press badge and identified himself to police officers as a member of the press. Yaghtin alleges he was assigned a police “detail” to accompany him through a crowd of counterprotesters out of concern that he was “fake press.” While Yaghtin was walking through the counterprotest zone, he began to converse with a counterprotester, who had asked him whether he was the person that had previously advocated for the execution of gay people. Officer Doe interrupted the exchange, and then escorted Yaghtin through the counterprotest zone. The panel held that Officer Doe was entitled to qualified immunity under the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, which asks whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct. The panel noted that plaintiffs did not challenge a city ordinance or permit scheme, and they expressly did not challenge the Spokane Police Department’s use of separate protest zones. Instead, plaintiffs’ challenge was directed at Officer Doe’s enforcement of these zones. The panel was not aware of any precedent that would alert Officer Doe that his enforcement would violate clearly established First Amendment law. Considering the lack of any precedent to the contrary, it was not unreasonable for Officer Doe to believe that it was lawful for him to examine the substance of Yaghtin’s speech in order to enforce the separate protest zone policy. The panel held that the City of Spokane could not be held liable because even assuming Spokane police officers violated Yaghtin’s First Amendment rights, nothing in the complaint plausibly alleged a policy, custom, or practice leading to that violation. Plaintiffs’ allegations amounted to 4 SAVED MAGAZINE V. SPOKANE POLICE DEP’T no more than an “isolated or sporadic incident” that could not form the basis of liability under Monell v. New York City Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).
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.