⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Fifth Circuit hears Fisher versus Texas Tech University, a student speech dispute about a disciplinary record and its consequences for becoming a lawyer. Ellen Fisher was a law student working in a university legal clinic. The university accused her of reacting with celebration to the killing of Charlie Kirk. Fisher disputes that characterization and says the school was punishing protected political expression. The school entered a written reprimand, and the dean reported the discipline to the Texas bar authorities with a recommendation against admitting her. Fisher sued and sought an injunction to undo the discipline and retract the report. The initial order under review denied preliminary relief on sovereign immunity grounds, rather than deciding which of her remarks the First Amendment protects. States ordinarily have immunity from suits of this kind in federal court. A limited exception permits relief against state officials to stop an ongoing violation of federal law. That brings the panel to a practical question: does clearing this record stop a continuing violation, or merely undo a completed official act? Fisher will argue that keeping the reprimand on file exposes her to future disclosures to licensing authorities and employers, so clearing it is forward-looking relief. The university will argue that she is trying to reverse past discipline, and that the court must evaluate the particular requests and evidence before the district judge. There is a separate hurdle for a preliminary injunction: showing a sufficiently immediate injury that money or later relief cannot adequately remedy. The district court addressed that issue when it later denied an expanded request for relief pending appeal. Keep those questions distinct as you listen: what a federal court has power to order, and whether urgent relief is justified on this record. This hearing concerns interim relief, not a trial determining whose description of the disputed speech is true.

Fisher v. Texas Tech University (No. 26-10536) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued November 2, 2026.