Case Explained: GORDON V. NEWSOM, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filed: 2026-06-24

Docket: 2:24-cv-06476-MRA-AS

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Carl Gordon’s pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging the validity of California’s September 14, 2021, gubernatorial recall election. The court held that the district court correctly dismissed claims against defendants in their official capacities under the doctrine of claim preclusion because the plaintiff raised or could have raised these claims in a prior federal action involving the same parties that resulted in a final judgment on the merits. Regarding claims for prospective injunctive and declaratory relief, the court affirmed dismissal on grounds of mootness, finding the challenged election had already occurred and its effects could not be undone, while noting the “capable of repetition yet evading review” exception did not apply. Finally, the court upheld the dismissal of damages claims based on qualified immunity, ruling that government officials are protected from liability unless they violated a clearly established federal statutory or constitutional right, and determining that Gordon failed to demonstrate such a violation or that the unlawfulness of the conduct was clearly established at the time. The judgment is affirmed, and all pending motions are denied.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.