Jayaraman

Jayaraman v. Oakland Unified School District

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 12, 20203:20-cv-00685California358 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEPHEN YOUNG, et al., Case No. 20-cv-00685-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. STRIKE REQUEST FOR

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL

DISTRICT, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 46 Defendants.

The School District’s motion to strike the request for injunctive relief is granted because the plaintiffs lack Article III standing to pursue injunctive relief. “To have standing to assert a claim for prospective injunctive relief, a plaintiff must demonstrate ‘that he is realistically threatened by a repetition of [the violation].’” Melendres v. Arpaio, 695 F.3d 990, 997 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 109 (1983)). The plaintiffs allege that they are parents and educators of students who attend schools in the District; that they participated in and spoke out at school board meetings to oppose school closures before the incident on October 23, 2019; and that, after the incident, they attended at least one meeting, during which the school board denied them participation by cutting the microphone. But these allegations are not enough. The…

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.