In Oliver v. Arnold, (5th Cir., June 29, 2021), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision dismissed a high school teacher's appeal of a Texas federal district court's refusal to grant his summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. The suit was brought by his former student who refused on religious grounds to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The student alleged that the teacher attempted to require her to transcribe the Pledge and when she refused, he continued to retaliate against her in class. The majority said in part:
Because Arnold seeks to have this court resolve the very factual disputes that the district court found to be genuine and properly submitted for trial on the merits, which we do not have jurisdiction to do, we grant Oliver’s motion and DISMISS the appeal.
Judge Duncan dissented, saying in part:
[C]onsider the implications of the majority’s approach. It sends to trial a § 1983 claim based on a student’s objection to a written assignment, merely because there is a question about the teacher’s motive for giving it. One can imagine where this approach might lead. It is not a happy place.
