Section 888
- Citation
- Section 888
- Parent Document
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Jurisdiction
- United States (federal)
- Effective Date
- 2017-12-23
Other Sections in This Document (99)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Open Cmtys. Alliance v. Carson, 286 F. Supp. 3d 148 (2017)
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
- Section 888
Full Text
2,144 charsThe Supreme Court, in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , 555 U.S. 7, 129 S.Ct. 365, 172 L.Ed.2d 249 (2008), has suggested that a plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must show each factor separately. Winter referred to the four factors conjunctively, holding that such a plaintiff "must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harmin the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest." 555 U.S. at 20, 129 S.Ct. 365. Winter also rejected the contention that "when a plaintiff demonstrates a strong likelihood of prevailing on the merits, a preliminary injunction may be entered based only on a 'possibility' of irreparable harm," holding that "plaintiffs seeking preliminary relief [must] demonstrate that irreparable injury is likely in the absence of an injunction." Id. at 21-22, 129 S.Ct. 365 (emphasis in original). The D.C. Circuit repeatedly has observed that "the so-called 'sliding-scale' approach to weighing the four preliminary injunction factors" may no longer be viable post-Winter , but has never resolved this question one way or the other. League of Women Voters , 838 F.3d at 7 ; see also Pursuing Am.'s Greatness , 831 F.3d at 505 n.1 ("We need not resolve here any tension in the case law regarding the showing required on the merits for a preliminary injunction."); Aamer v. Obama , 742 F.3d 1023, 1043 (D.C. Cir. 2014) ("[I]t remains an open question whether the 'likelihood of success' factor is 'an independent, free-standing requirement,' or whether, in cases where the other three factors strongly favor issuing an injunction, a plaintiff need only raise a 'serious legal question' on the merits. ... But we have no need to resolve this question here because the remaining factors do not, in any event, weigh in petitioners' favor."); Sherley , 644 F.3d at 392-93 ("[W]e read Winter at least to suggest if not to hold that a likelihood of success is an independent, free-standing requirement for a preliminary injunction." (internal quotation marks omitted)).