Sessler v. City of Davenport, No. 19-3290 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin defendants from enforcing the City of Davenport's Special Events Policy against him. In this case, plaintiff seeks to protect his right to share his religious messages in public spaces within Davenport. The district court found that the Street Fest was a traditional public forum and that law enforcement's decision to move plaintiff to an adjacent location was likely a content-neutral limitation on the time, place, and manner of his speech.
The court concluded that the district court did not err in determining the Special Events Policy was a content-neutral permitting scheme. Furthermore, even if it the court assumed for purposes of this appeal, without deciding, that plaintiff has shown a likelihood of success on the merits, the court found that plaintiff's inability to demonstrate a threat of irreparable harm heavily weighs against granting preliminary injunctive relief.
Court Description: [Melloy, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge, and Loken, Circuit Judge] Civil case - Injunctions. Plaintiff sought to enjoin enforcement of the City's Special Events Policy, which he alleged abridged his First Amendment rights to preach and display signs in public spaces during certain events, such as the City's annual Street Fest; the district court found that the Street Fest was a traditional public forum and that law enforcement's decision to move plaintiff to an adjacent location was likely a content-neutral limitation on the time, place, and manner of his speech; the district court then denied plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction. Held: the district court did not err in determining the Special Events Policy was content-neutral; even if plaintiff could show a likelihood of success on the merits, he was not entitled to injunctive relief because he failed to establish he will suffer irreparable harm absent the court's intervention; on this record, the district court did not err in denying plaintiff's request for preliminary injunctive relief.
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.