The following excerpt is from Hart v. Tuolumne Fire Dist., CASE NO. CV F 11-1272 LJO DLB, Doc. 15 (E.D. Cal. 2011):
In order to demonstrate a First Amendment violation, a plaintiff must allege that "by his actions [the defendant] deterred or chilled [the plaintiff's] political speech and such deterrence was a substantial or motivating factor in [the defendant's] conduct." Mendocino Environmental Center v. Mendocino
Page 6
County, 192 F.3d 1283, 1300 (9th Cir. 1999). Intent to inhibit speech "is an element of the claim." Id. at 1301. The goal is to prevent, or redress, actions by a government official that chill the exercise of protected First Amendment rights. Coszalter v. City of Salem, 320 F.3d 968, 974-75 (9th Cir.2003).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.