discussed Cited "see" DOE v. WEINTRAUB See Stilp, 743 F. Supp. 2d at 470–71 (“[I]t is incontrovertible that ‘curtailing constitutionally protected speech will not advance the public interest.’” (quoting ACLU v. Reno, 217 F.3d 162, 180 (3d Cir. 2000), vacated on other grounds sub nom., Ashcroft v. ACLU, 533 U.S. 973 (2001))).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Stilp v. Contino In the context of a First Amendment challenge, “[t]he most significant and, indeed, the dispositive prong of the preliminary injunction analysis ... is whether the plaintiffs bore their burden of establishing that they had a reasonable probability of succeeding on the merits....” ACLU v. Ashcroft, 322 F.3d 240, 250-51 (3d Cir.2003); see also ACLU v. Reno, 217 F.3d 162, 180 (3d Cir.2000) (holding that a plaintiff that establishes a reasonable probability of succeeding on the merits of a First Amendment claim will “almost certainly” suffer irreparable injury, and that “[cjurtailing con…