Nat'l Inst. of Family & Life Advocates v. Becerra
Nat'l Inst. of Family & Life Advocates v. Becerra
Opinion of the Court
In light of National Institute of Family and Life Advocates ("NIFLA") v. Becerra , --- U.S. ----,
"A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish [1] that he is likely to succeed on the merits, [2] that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, [3] that the balance of the equities tips in his favor, *901and [4] that an injunction is in the public interest." Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. ,
In NIFLA , the Supreme Court concluded that NIFLA, Pregnancy Care Center, and Fallbrook Pregnancy Resource Center ("Plaintiffs") were "likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the [California Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act] violates the First Amendment."
The district court further premised its analysis of the other three Winter factors on its conclusion that Plaintiffs' First Amendment claim was not likely to succeed. We therefore vacate the district court's order on the three remaining Winter factors and remand for the district court to consider them again in light of NIFLA .
Plaintiffs-Appellants shall recover their costs on appeal from Defendants-Appellees.
REVERSED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.