https://texasappeals.org/topics/ex-parte-young/Clinical descriptions of the Texas appellate decisions drawing the most press coverage.Hugo -- gohugo.ioen-usMon, 11 May 2026 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2026/05/united-states-v-texas-sb-4-en-banc/Mon, 11 May 2026 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2026/05/united-states-v-texas-sb-4-en-banc/Sitting en banc, the court held that two legal-services nonprofits and El Paso County had not shown an Article III injury and vacated the preliminary injunction against the state immigration law. The majority stated that it did not address whether S.B. 4 is preempted by federal law.https://texasappeals.org/2025/11/woodlands-pride-v-paxton-sb-12/Mon, 17 Nov 2025 07:00:00 -0600https://texasappeals.org/2025/11/woodlands-pride-v-paxton-sb-12/The court held that 360 Queen Entertainment established standing to seek an injunction against the Attorney General of Texas under Section One of Senate Bill 12, and that the other plaintiffs did not establish standing against the remaining appellants. It did not decide whether the law violates the First Amendment, remanding for the district court to apply *Moody v. NetChoice*.https://texasappeals.org/2025/09/spectrum-wt-v-wendler-campus-drag-show/Mon, 01 Sep 2025 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2025/09/spectrum-wt-v-wendler-campus-drag-show/The court held that, on the current record, the student group’s intended drag show would have conveyed a message implicating the First Amendment, that the campus venue is a designated public forum, and that the university president had not argued his content-based restriction survives strict scrutiny. It rendered a judgment dismissing the claim against the system chancellor for want of jurisdiction; Judge Ho dissented.