Opinion ID: 792362
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Remaining Elements of Retaliation

Text: 37 Evans-Marshall's allegations also satisfy the remaining elements of a First Amendment retaliation claim. Specifically, non-renewal is an injury that would likely chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing in [the] activity. Cockrel, 270 F.3d at 1048, 1055. As noted above, Evans-Marshall adequately alleges that her non-renewal was motivated at least in part as a response to the exercise of her free speech rights. Id. at 1055. 38 As to the rebuttal of the individual defendants, our inquiry is again limited by the early stage of this case. Assuming, as we must, that the allegations of the Complaint are true, and without the benefit of factual discovery, the individual defendants cannot show that they would have taken the same action even in the absence of the protected conduct. Id. at 1048. Indeed, Evans-Marshall alleges that the public outcry related to her protected First Amendment activity was the motivating factor behind her termination.