Opinion ID: 3010735
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: In evaluating the claim that CBM's First Amendment rights have been violated, we have a constitutional duty to conduct an independent examination of the record as a whole, without deference to the trial court. Hurley v. IrishAmerican Gay Group of Boston, 115 S.Ct. 2338, 2344 (1995). This independent duty does not extend to the district court's rulings on matters of credibility, to which we continue to defer, id. (citing Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657, 688 (1989)), but it does require us draw our own inferences from the factual 7 evidence presented. United States v. Antar, 38 F.3d 1348, 1357 (3d Cir. 1994); Swineford v. Snyder Co. Pa., 15 F.3d 1258, 1165 (3d Cir. 1994).