Free Speech Coalition v. Reno

220 F.3d 1113, 2000 WL 1010063
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 24, 2000
DocketNo. 97-16536
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 220 F.3d 1113 (Free Speech Coalition v. Reno) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Free Speech Coalition v. Reno, 220 F.3d 1113, 2000 WL 1010063 (9th Cir. 2000).

Opinions

ORDER; Dissent by Judge WARDLAW.

ORDER

The panel as constituted above, has voted as follows: Judges Thomas and Molloy voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judge Thomas voted to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc and Judge Mol-loy recommends rejection of the suggestion; Judge Ferguson voted to grant the [1114]*1114petition for rehearing and recommended granting the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

A judge of the court called for a vote on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. A vote was taken, and a majority of the active judges of the court failed to vote for en banc rehearing. Fed. R.App. P. 35(f).

The petition for rehearing is denied and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gonzales v. Free Speech Coalition
408 F.3d 613 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
The Free Speech Coalition v. Janet Reno
220 F.3d 1113 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
220 F.3d 1113, 2000 WL 1010063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/free-speech-coalition-v-reno-ca9-2000.