Lopez v. Ramirez

── Lopez v. Ramirez ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Date: May 27, 2026 Category: Civil Rights Case: 25-40170 Document: 100-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/27/2026 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED May 27, 2026 No. 25-40170 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Marin Lopez; Pedro Bermea; Trinidad Lopez; Arturo Menchaca; Eladio Bermudez; Javier Garcia; Robert Guerra; Luis Carlos Gonzalez; Epigmenio “TJ” Gonzalez; Juan Garcia, Jr.; Julio Eguia; Aaron Garcia, Plaintiffs—Appellees, versus Eduardo Ramirez; Noe Castillo; Basilio D. Villareal, Jr.; Roel Gonzalez, Defendants—Appellants. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:20-CV-33 ______________________________ ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING Before Willett, Wilson, and Douglas, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-40170 Document: 100-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/27/2026 No. 25-40170 Treating the petition for rehearing en banc as a petition for panel rehearing, the petition for panel rehearing is GRANTED. See 5th Cir. R. 35 I.O.P. Our prior panel opinion, Lopez v. Ramirez, No. 25-40170, 2026 WL 893104 (5th Cir. Apr. 1, 2026) (unpublished), is WITHDRAWN and the following opinion is SUBSTITUTED therefor: This is the third interlocutory appeal following the district court’s denial of an immunity-based motion to dismiss in a First Amendment retaliation suit brought by twelve school-district employees against three school-board members and a former interim superintendent. Twice before we have vacated the district court’s orders and remanded because it denied Defendants’ motions without analysis. This time, the district court referred the case to mediation and, in the same order, denied Defendants’ motion without prejudice to refiling the same after mediation concluded. Because the district court’s mediation order was not an appealable final decision for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we DISMISS for lack of jurisdiction. I Twelve employees of the Rio Grande City Consolidated Independent School District allege that after they publicly supported a slate of candidates in a 2018 school-board election, they were demoted, reassigned, and subjected to pay cuts in retaliation for their speech. They brought First Amendment retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against board members Eduardo Ramirez, Noe Castillo, and Basilio D. Villareal, Jr., and former interim superintendent Roel Gonzalez. Defendants moved to dismiss on multiple grounds including absolute legislative immunity and, alternatively, qualified immunity. The district court denied Defendants’ motion “without prejudice to refiling as a motion for summary judgment” in a minute-entry order with no analysis or reasons given. Defendants filed their first interlocutory appeal. 2 Case: 25-40170 Document: 100-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/27/2026 No. 25-40170 We vacated and remanded “to allow the district court to reassess [Defen