amendment case that basically is that the contours of this case the nd element of this this case which i'll discuss briefly is is causation the district court will know that's not that's not the causation state you and i might add in this i was rude to me not healthy earlier that's a motivating factor analysis and you still despite the but for training of the supreme court that exercising free speech would result of that no obligation if your problem is this is a qualified immunity jet versus dallas independent school district ninety five school very very simple you got a principal man a car who is not the final decision maker but that did not relieve him of liability according to the score was section seven in clause two is even more specific than the st amendment because it says every person shall have the right to express their views on some  provides an avenue for appeal to appeal to the best the board and they took that decision and went up with it the next thing that happens is that an independent review or rd party review or through the funding the budgets the school calendars and all those types of things however as superintendent why point it out the school worse independent evaluation to defended why he testified was deposition that it was not the statements about corporal punishment that he was concerned with his concern was about the airing of  personal disciplinary actions with regards to minor children on a national television show if you're really in a reality television show and airing that airing the discipline of the children oh you kingdom builder's charter that they were a part of all and that was something that was brought up during the telephone conversation he said that and i can't remember the actual language something about her views on corporal punishment but he clarified it was deposition that that that was specifically directed towards the judgment and leadership and what that says about  this program raised concerns to him that he wanted to a lot further review and address and i think that's what you're getting to is that are you making such a big deal about thirty dollars now which is that there she was discussing minor children those views or acted out in a in a setting where they are actually enforced on her children then enforced in a way in which the children might be affected by that in her judgment in the player steps issue of saying that she did not have control of how the beard was going to be presented in this television program and yet she still allowed her children  to be shown on the television program and be shown being disciplined and their bad behavior and so i think yes i think corporal punishment is a zero something that the retaliation here and you can see that or not based on you that that that there's been retaliating here i start in violation of someone's personal rights i don't believe that to be the case i think she has a right to speech oh and a right to to speak her opinions however that does not in united her especially in this context which we would say is a bit of a hybrid not purely a private citizen speech case because in this case we're dealing with a potential contract with a potential oh regulatory environment if you will where the board is determining whether or not this person who's going to be regulated by the board will give a contract  did issue were a part of the court specifically went through the case law regarding a non final decision makers liability for first amendment retaliation it went through and touched on the case with jet toast touched on the case of johnson v louisiana and in doing so it explained how the law came to be and how the law came to be modeled up  after janet and intervening opinions from this court in which the issue was made unclear by host jeff opinions that have said that a non final decision neighbor and non final decision maker cannot be liable for st amendment retaliation is special in the context of simply making a recommendation to the board make that decision in the court of the sims specifically such that official would be entitled to qualified immunity because laws that clearly established at that time just so it was with mr covington in the sims we see him as a go case the individual so it is here with  superintendent white that regardless of the determination and hope the st problem as to whether or not a constitutional violation was actually proven the underlying clearly established law was not clearly established at that time the one back going back to two of our other arguments that we have raised in brief there are two additional avenues if you will in which you can upload the district court's ruling even if own alternative grounds we've raised the issue of sovereign immunity the plaintiff contest that he has named superintendent w characterized as an individual capacity claim setting that issue aside we've also raised the issue of absolute cause i judicial immunity this is another instance in which the best people order is an independent board makes regulatory and important decisions on education in stable wheezy and for all the leader in secondary education it is extremely important that the board in the members and the  individual that come before the board have protection from harassment and retaliation claims and lawsuits because of information that you shared with the board decisions that are  made in each of these board meetings in which the plaintiff or the kingdom builders what was involved they had ample opportunity to speak to the concerns speak to the board members to watch the video from this american supernanny show she gave them the link and suggested that they go watch it and ask them to go watch it and so it is very difficult for us to understand how her suggesting to the best members to go watch the herself encourage them to go to d l when they make a decision for themselves as to the underlying issues and whether or not they believe that she is qualified and proper to be a charter applicant the leader of a school there this in there and basically he said no he said i did this on a holistic basis i say where's hulet holistic basis in your regulators were he couldn't he couldn't answer that either and they talk about