⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit hears a dispute over a Spokane City Council resolution. In 2023, the council denounced then-Mayor Woodward for publicly appearing with Matthew Shea. The resolution described Shea as an identified domestic terrorist. Shea says the council branded and effectively banished him without a judicial trial. He sued the city and councilmembers, claiming an unconstitutional bill of attainder. That means legislation singling out a person or group for punishment without a court trial. The trial judge dismissed his First Amendment claims but allowed the attainder claim to proceed and put off deciding the immunity defenses. That was a ruling on whether the case could continue, not a finding that Shea's allegations were true. Zachary Pekelis, for the city and councilmembers, will argue that condemnation without legal restrictions is not punishment. Christopher Hogue, for Shea, will argue that the official branding itself inflicted unconstitutional punishment. The councilmembers also invoke qualified immunity, which can shield officials from damages unless they violated clearly established federal rights.

Shea v. City of Spokane, et al. (No. 26-86) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 28, 2026.