Brown v. Fed. Election Comm'n (2019)
green
· 10 citation events
across 1 courts.
Showing the 8 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (2020)
See Guedes 920 F.3d at 10 ; see also Brown, 386 F. Supp. 3d at 24 (“[W]ithout a likelihood of success on the merits, [p]laintiffs are not entitled to a preliminary injunction regardless of their showing on the other factors.”).
“[W]ithout a likelihood of success on the merits, [p]laintiffs are not entitled to a preliminary injunction regardless of their showing on the other factors.”
Election Comm’n, 386 F. Supp. 3d 16, 24 (D.D.C. 2019) (citing Ark.
citing Ark. Dairy Co-op Ass’n, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 573 F.3d 815, 832 (D.C. Cir. 2009)
green
Physicians for Social Responsibility v. Buttigieg (2024)
Thus, “without a likelihood of success on the merits, Plaintiffs are not entitled to a preliminary injunction regardless of their showing on the other factors.” Brown v. FEC, 386 F. Supp. 3d 16, 24 (D.D.C. 2019) (citing Ark.
citing Ark. Dairy Coop. Ass’n, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 573 F.3d 815, 832 (D.C. Cir. 2009)
Cir. Feb. 11, 2022) (“Without a cause of action, Unsuck cannot ultimately succeed on the merits of its suit.”); Brown v. FEC, 386 F. Supp. 3d 16, 28 (D.D.C. 2019) (“Plaintiffs are also unlikely to succeed on the merits . . . [because] Count III contains no discernible cause of action.”); Butler v. Georgetown Univ., No. 22-1517, 2022 WL 1773479 , at *3 (D.D.C.
“Plaintiffs are also unlikely to succeed on the merits . . . [because] Count III contains no discernible cause of action.”
green
Republican National Committee v. Pelosi (2022)
So for example, in Brown v. FEC, this Court did not apply such an assumption in considering First Amendment political speech claims, reasoning that the irreparable harm factor is “intertwined with the merits” and holding that plaintiffs who are “unlikely to succeed on the merits of their constitutional claims . . . cannot show irreparable injury through the loss of constitutional freedoms.” See 386 F. Supp. 3d 16, 34 (D.D.C. 2019) (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing P…
internal quotation marks omitted
green
Gorgadze v. Blinken (2021)
But not all of the four factors weigh equally: “[t]he first two factors are paramount in the preliminary injunction analysis.” McCutcheon v. FEC, 496 F. Supp. 3d 318 , 329 (D.D.C. 2020). “[W]ithout a likelihood of success on the merits, [p]laintiffs are not entitled to a preliminary injunction regardless of their 10 showing on the other factors.” Brown v. FEC, 386 F. Supp. 3d 16, 24 (D.D.C. 2019) (citing Ark.
citing Ark. Dairy Coop. Ass’n, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 573 F.3d 815, 832 (D.C. Cir. 2009)
green
Liu v. Blinken (2021)
Thus, “without a likelihood of success on the merits, Plaintiffs are not entitled to a preliminary injunction regardless of their showing on the other factors.” Brown v. FEC, 386 F. Supp. 3d 16, 24 (D.D.C. 2019) (citing Ark.
citing Ark. Dairy Coop Ass’n, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 573 F.3d 815, 832 (D.C. Cir. 2009). B. Motions to Dismiss A motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1
green
Beberman v. U.S. Department of State (2019)
Election Comm’n, 386 F. Supp. 3d 16, 33 (D.D.C. 2019).