Jonathan Davidson v. City of Stafford, Texas, et a, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 2189

Background

Davidson protested outside a Stafford, TX Planned Parenthood by standing on a grassy easement, holding a sign, waving at cars, and handing cards to people who stopped.
A clinic employee complained to police that Davidson was approaching patients and flagging down customers; dispatch described a “suspicious person” flagging customers.
Officers Flagg and Jones contacted Davidson, asked him to identify himself; Davidson gave only his first name (“Jonathan”) and declined to provide ID or a last name; officers arrested him for failure to identify (Tex. Penal Code § 38.02) and charged him the same night.
The district court granted summary judgment for the officers (qualified immunity) and for the City and Chief Krahn (no official policy or supervisory liability). Davidson appealed.
The Fifth Circuit held (1) officers lacked actual probable cause and were not entitled to qualified immunity, (2) the City and Chief Krahn were entitled to summary judgment on municipal and supervisory claims, and (3) remanded for consideration of Davidson’s as-applied First Amendment challenge to §§ 38.02 and 42.03.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Were Officers Flagg and Jones entitled to qualified immunity for arresting Davidson?	Arrest lacked probable cause; arrest chilled First and Fourth Amendment rights.	Officers had at least arguable probable cause (obstruction § 42.03 and failure-to-ID § 38.02) based on clinic employee’s report.	Reversed: officers had no actual or arguable probable cause for arrest; qualified immunity denied.
Was the City of Stafford liable under Monell for an official policy causing the arrest?	City had an unconstitutional policy/misinterpretation of § 38.02 (Chief Krahn’s testimony, ratification, and a pattern of § 38.02 arrests).	No official policy; isolated incidents and Chief Krahn’s testimony do not establish municipal policymaking or a pattern.	Affirmed: no genuine dispute of an official policy or sufficient pattern; summary judgment for City affirmed.
Is Chief Krahn individually liable under a supervisory-failure theory?	Krahn’s interpretation/oversight led to predictable unconstitutional arrests; failure to train/supervise.	No evidence of deliberate indifference or notice of a pattern; officers were trained and facts do not show a highly predictable result.	Affirmed: Davidson failed to show deliberate indifference or the necessary causal link; summary judgment for Krahn affirmed.
Does Davidson have an as-applied First Amendment claim to §§ 38.02 and 42.03 for protesting at the clinic?	Statutes, as applied to his protest and arrest risk, chill his future speech; he intends to return to protest.	Defendants argued officers had arguable probable cause (district court relied on this).	Remanded: Fifth Circuit held Davidson has standing and an as-applied claim; district court must consider and, if appropriate, enter a tailored declaratory remedy.

Key Cases Cited

Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (establishes qualified immunity two-prong test)
Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 31 (defines probable cause for arrests)
Club Retro, L.L.C. v. Hilton, 568 F.3d 181 (Fourth Amendment false-arrest principles; probable-cause need not be for the charged offense)
Keenan v. Tejeda, 290 F.3d 252 (retaliation and probable-cause interaction with First Amendment claims)
Hogan v. Cunningham, 722 F.3d 725 (warrantless arrest and clearly established law on probable cause)
Reichle v. Howards, 132 S. Ct. 2088 (qualified-immunity standard on clearly established rights)
Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability framework under § 1983)
Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469 (single-act policymaker liability)
City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (failure-to-train deliberate indifference standard)
Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (limits on municipal liability via failure to train)
Operation Rescue–Nat’l v. Planned Parenthood of Hous. & Se. Tex., Inc., 975 S.W.2d 546 (Texas law balancing protest rights and clinic access)
Iranian Muslim Org. v. City of San Antonio, 615 S.W.2d 202 (Texas recognition of public demonstration First Amendment protections)
Faust v. State, 491 S.W.3d 733 (Texas Crim. App. acknowledging protestors’ First Amendment rights)