Todd Reardon, Sr. v. Jesse Danley, 74 F.4th 825

Todd Reardon ran against incumbent State’s Attorney Jesse Danley in Coles County, Illinois, lost, then sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment violations by Danley, other officials, the City of Mattoon, and Coles County.
Three discrete events formed the basis of the complaint: (1) a 2019 subpoena for Reardon’s Facebook data (Judge Thomas O’Shaughnessy denied Reardon’s motion to quash but delayed release until a probable-cause hearing); (2) Coles County Board member Stan Metzger’s removal of a Reardon campaign sign and his explanation at a county board meeting; and (3) Mattoon Police Chief Jason Taylor posting a photo in uniform with Danley on the official MPD Facebook page urging votes for Danley.
Reardon sought an injunction preventing the judge from releasing Facebook documents, alleged Metzger’s sign removal and board statements violated his First Amendment rights, and claimed Taylor/Danley/City engaged in unconstitutional campaign activity depriving him of equal political opportunity.
District court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim; Reardon appealed.
Seventh Circuit reviewed de novo and evaluated whether each claim plausibly alleged state-action and other § 1983 prerequisites and whether injunctive relief against a judge was permissible.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Injunction to prevent release of Facebook records by state judge	Reardon sought to enjoin Judge O’Shaughnessy from releasing subpoenaed Facebook documents	Judicial officer acted in judicial capacity; injunctive relief barred under §1983 unless exceptions apply	Dismissed: no allegation that declaratory relief was unavailable or that a declaratory decree was violated; injunctive relief claim fails
Sign removal by County Board member (Metzger)	Metzger removed sign and then defended conduct at board meeting; Reardon asserts First Amendment interference and that board ratified conduct	Metzger’s removal was private conduct; no allegation he acted under color of state law; county ratification not plausibly pleaded	Dismissed: complaint fails to allege Metzger acted under color of state law; county ratification claim deficient because motive and board approval of that motive were not alleged
Police chief’s Facebook endorsement of Danley	MPD chief posted in uniform urging votes for Danley; alleged exclusive campaign advertising and Equal Protection/First Amendment violation	Defendants argue no constitutional violation shown and plaintiff cites no controlling authority; Monell claim requires underlying constitutional violation	Dismissed: Reardon failed to identify authority or plead an underlying constitutional violation necessary for municipal liability

Smith v. City of Hammond, 388 F.3d 304 (7th Cir.) (injunctive relief against judges under §1983 is limited absent a violated declaratory decree or unavailability of declaratory relief)
Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40 (1999) (purely private conduct, however wrongful, does not constitute state action for §1983)
First Midwest Bank v. City of Chicago, 988 F.3d 978 (7th Cir.) (public employment alone does not make conduct "under color of state law")
Spiegel v. McClintic, 916 F.3d 611 (7th Cir.) (municipal liability by ratification requires adoption of both the conduct and the unconstitutional motive)
Darchak v. City of Chi. Bd. of Educ., 580 F.3d 622 (7th Cir.) (ratification fails where the board was unaware of any retaliatory motive for the adopted action)
Palka v. City of Chicago, 662 F.3d 428 (7th Cir.) (no §1983 liability where no evidence the ratifying authority shared the initial actor’s unconstitutional motivation)
Shipley v. Chi. Bd. of Election Comm’rs, 947 F.3d 1056 (7th Cir.) (arguments lacking supporting authority are waived)
Word v. City of Chicago, 946 F.3d 391 (7th Cir.) (Monell claim requires proof of an underlying constitutional violation)