Asu Students for Life v. Michael Crow

Good Law
357 F. App'x 156
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 200908-15905California365 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

We take judicial notice of Arizona State University’s (ASU) revisions to its one-zone and insurance policy. ASU Students for Life (ASUSL) is not challenging this new policy. It is “absolutely clear” that ASU will not revert to its 2005 policy, see Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs., Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 189 , 120 S.Ct. 693 , 145 L.Ed.2d 610 (2000), because, among other reasons, Appellees stated in open court that ASU will not return to that policy and ASU’s revised insurance requirements are consistent with current case law, see Long Beach Area Peace Network v. City of Long Beach, 574 F.3d 1011, 1031 (9th Cir.2009); Santa Monica Food Not Bombs v. City of Santa Monica, 450 F.3d 1022, 1057-58 (9th Cir.2006). Therefore, ASUSL’s claims for prospective relief are moot. We vacate the portion of the district court’s order that deals with ASUSL’s claims for prospective relief and remand with instructions to dismiss these claims. See U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall P’ship, 513 U.S. 18, 25 , 115 S.Ct. 386 , 130 L.Ed.2d 233 (1994).

ASUSL’s claims for nominal damages against Ramage and Schroeder in their individual capacities also fail. Even assuming…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.