Cato had urged the Supreme Court to reverse the Fifth Circuit's ruling in Villarreal v. Alaniz.

[Ilikepurple]

1. I guess Walter assumes everyone is familiar with the case and the Cato Institute's Amicus brief?

Why does it matter? The linked article does provide context, but the following is my take. It is a short attempt at summing up the legal history of this case. Upon rereading, I’m not sure it makes things any more clear than the linked article, but I am posting just in case it’s helpful to someone.

Villarreal, a journalist, was arrested and jailed for violating a Texas law prohibiting the solicitation of nonpublic information from a public servant. The District Court granted her a writ a habeas corpus and determined the law unconstitutionally vague. Texas did not appeal this ruling. Villarreal sued. District Court dismissed all of her claims for 12(b)(c) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (i.e., defendants’ qualified immunity protected the from suit). Villarreal appealed. Fifth Circuit panel reversed in 2-1 decision. Defendant sought and were granted en banc rehearing with all 16 Fifth Circuit Judges. The 5th Circuit then found that the officers had qualified immunity in their arrest and District Court’s dismissal was upheld. It went up to SCOTUS. SCOTUS sent back down to Fifth Circuit for reconsideration. Fifth Circuit funds ruled and returned with the same decision of qualified immunity. Villarreal appeals again and SCOTUS just refused to hear the case.
Why does it matter? Justice Sotomayor sort of sums up the consequences in the following excerpt of her dissent
The Court’s intervention is warranted because the Fifth
Circuit’s position undermines important bedrock constitu-
tional protections. Under its view, police officers may ar-
rest journalists for core First Amendment activity so long
as they can point to a statute that the activity violated and
that no high state court had previously invalidated,
whether facially or as applied. This rule creates a perverse
scheme in which officials can arrest someone for protected
activity, decline to appeal a trial court’s decision declaring
the statute unconstitutional (as the county did here), and
use qualified immunity to avoid liability by citing back to
that statute. The Court’s decision today prevents
12 VILLARREAL v. ALANIZ
SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting