William Saunders, Jr. v. Art Council of Princeton


NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 21-1118 __________ WILLIAM HARDY SAUNDERS, JR., artist and photographer, member of class represent minority group; as individual; and on behalf class all other persons similarly situated John and Mary Does one through hundred yet to be identified and determine part of this action a suit for damages, Appellant v. ART COUNCIL OF PRINCETON; JIM LEVINE, Executive Director; MARIA EVANS, as the Artistic Director, and are each; being sued individually and in official capacity; LIZ LEMPERT, Mayor, being sued individually; COUNCIL MEMBERS, individually and in official capacity; CITY, MUNICIPALITY PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY; PRINCETON UNIVERSITY; LEWIS CENTER FOR THE ARTS; MUSEUM OF ART FOR PRINCETON UNIVERSITY; PRINCETON HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISION; PUBLIC ART SELECTION COMMITTEE OF PRINCETON; JOHN AND MARY DOES 1-100; SHIRLEY SATTERFIELD, as individual; MARION DAVIA, sued as individual; BARBARA A. HILLIER, Individually; ROBERT HILLIER, Individually; TIMOTHY M. ANDREWS, Chief Executive Officer, and the Advertising Specialty Institute, each, being sued individually; SETH B. HINSHAW, individually, and in official capacity; JOINT EFFORT SAFE STREETS PROGRAM, entity; JOHN BAILEY, organizer, each being sued individually and in official capacity; THE STUDIO HILLIER, entity; LETICIA FRAGA, Councilwoman, being sued individually and in official capacity; WISE PRESERVATION PLANNING, as entity; ELIZABETH H. KIM, Officer, and, in all, each are being sued individually and in official capacity; WITHERSPOON-JACKSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION; PUBLIC ARTS SELECTION COMMITTEE; HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, AND COMMISSIONERS ____________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 3-19-cv-19018) District Judge: Honorable Anne E. Thompson ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) August 24, 2021 Before: MCKEE, SHWARTZ, and RESTREPO, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed December 28, 2021) ___________ OPINION* ___________ PER CURIAM William Saunders appeals the District Court’s order dismissing his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Appellant also appeals the denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction, his motion for a temporary restraining order, and his motion to appoint counsel. For the reasons set forth below, we will affirm. I. Saunders filed a complaint against the Arts Council of Princeton and various defendants affiliated with the municipality of Princeton, New Jersey, and Princeton University on behalf of the African American residents of Princeton’s historically African American Witherspoon-Jackson neighborhood. Saunders is an African American artist and a Princeton native. He stated that the local government passed an ordinance to preserve Witherspoon-Jackson and its African American heritage. Saunders claimed the * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 2 defendants violated this ordinance when they proposed and approved a mural celebrating Hispanic heritage to be painted in the neighborhood. He also alleged that the defendants misused national grant funds and maintained a discriminatory sanctuary city policy. The District Court twice screened Saunders’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, finding both times that he had failed to state a claim but granting Saunders an opportunity to amend after each dismissal. Following …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals