Olivier v. City of Brandon · ¶2
Held: Olivier's suit seeking purely prospective relief—an injunction stopping officials from enforcing an ordinance in the future—can proceed, notwithstanding Olivier's prior conviction for violating that ordinance; Heck does not hold otherwise. Pp. 560–567. (a) Before the Court's decision in Heck, the City would have had no plausible basis for claiming Olivier's suit is barred. That type of suit falls within § 1983's heartland: Assuming a credible threat of prosecution, a plaintiff may bring a § 1983 action to challenge a local law as violating the Constitution and to prevent that law's future enforcement. See, e. g., Steffel v. Thompson, 415 U. S. 452. In Wooley v. Maynard, 430 U. S. 705, the Court held that rule to apply even when the plaintiff was previously convicted under the challenged law. The Court explained that because the suit at issue sought “wholly prospective” re-…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.