Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument: Do Nominal Damages Requests Save A Case From Mootness?

On January 12, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, which occurred in the context of religious speech on a college campus. The question at issue in the case is whether a plaintiff may proceed with a case when all that remains at issue is a claim for nominal damages. This case could have important ramifications for civil rights cases where plaintiffs have been subjected to an allegedly unconstitutional policy that is thereafter changed or abandoned by a defendant.

Background: University's Freedom of Expression Policy Challenged

The student plaintiff in this case, Chike Uzuegbunam, distributed religious literature in an open, outdoor plaza on the campus of Georgia Gwinnett College (GGC). He was prohibited from that distribution and from subsequent attempts to speak and distribute literature under GGC's "Freedom of Expression Policy" which limited expressive activity to certain areas of campus and required