Cases compared
Gensler v. South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees vs. Brannberg v. Cimino vs. Olamide Olatayo Bello v. United States
No. 26-38No. 26-480No. 26-5206
Side by side
| Fact | Howard Gensler, Petitioner v. South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees, et al. | Judy A. Brannberg v. John A. Cimino | Olamide Olatayo Bello v. United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | Howard Gensler, Petitioner v. South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees, et al.26-38 | Judy A. Brannberg v. John A. Cimino26-480 | Olamide Olatayo Bello v. United States26-5206 |
| Status | Howard Gensler, Petitioner v. South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees, et al.Dismissed | Judy A. Brannberg v. John A. CiminoBefore Arguments | Olamide Olatayo Bello v. United StatesBefore Arguments |
| Date | Howard Gensler, Petitioner v. South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees, et al.October Term 2026 (2026–2027) | Judy A. Brannberg v. John A. CiminoOctober Term 2026 (2026–2027) | Olamide Olatayo Bello v. United StatesOctober Term 2026 (2026–2027) |
| Question presented | Howard Gensler, Petitioner v. South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees, et al.1. Does the First Amendment prevent a college from employing a harassment policy to terminate a faculty member for true college lecture statements, symbolic clothing, non-sexual, non-racial epithets, and profanity? 2. Does due process require establishment of jurisdiction? 3. Does equal protection prevent woke college administrators and judges from ignoring the law to terminate a male community college faculty member? | Judy A. Brannberg v. John A. Cimino1. Whether the “finality” clause in C.R.S. § 22-30.5-108(3)(d), which bars judicial review of charter school application denials, violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments when those denials resulted from constitutional violations. 2. Whether a state civil rights agency (CCRD) violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments by refusing to assert jurisdiction over third-party religious employment discrimination and retaliation claims by the Authorizer in charter school applications, in direct conflict with binding EEOC policy and federal precedent. 3. Whether Colorado’s unreviewable attorney regulation—under which the Colorado Supreme Court Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel (“OARC”) decisions are final and non-appealable under Chessin v. OARC, 2020 CO 9—shields attorney misconduct, RICO, fraud, forgery, bribery, sabotage of counsel, religious discrimination, and Unauthorized Practice of Law by a disbarred attorney from discipline, thereby violating First and Fourteenth Amendments. | Olamide Olatayo Bello v. United States1. Whether the dismissal of a criminal appeal for failure to respond to a notice that Petitioner never received while in a facility he was in the process of leaving, during continuous Bureau of Prisons custody, violated the Due Process Clause under Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (1950), and the right to a first appeal of right recognized in Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387 (1985), and Rodriquez v. United States, 395 U.S. 327 (1969). 2. Whether the loss of an entire first appeal of right through court-created notice failure constitutes structural error under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), requiring reinstatement without a showing of prejudice. 3. Whether the Fifth Circuit’s reinstatement of other appeals following materially identical notice failures, while denying Petitioner relief, denies the equal protection of the laws guaranteed against the federal Government through the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. |
| Summary | Howard Gensler, Petitioner v. South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees, et al.Howard Gensler asked the Supreme Court to review his challenge to South Orange County Community College District’s use of a harassment policy to terminate him, raising First Amendment, due-process, and equal-protection questions. The Court refused to hear the case (denied review), so it did not decide those questions. | Judy A. Brannberg v. John A. CiminoJudy A. Brannberg has asked the Supreme Court to review Colorado’s bar on court challenges to charter-school application denials, a state civil-rights agency’s refusal to consider religious-employment discrimination and retaliation claims, and limits on review of attorney-discipline decisions. She argues these rules violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments and that the attorney-regulation system leaves alleged misconduct beyond discipline. | Olamide Olatayo Bello v. United StatesOlamide Olatayo Bello says the Fifth Circuit dismissed his criminal appeal after he did not answer a notice he says he never received while leaving a Bureau of Prisons facility in federal custody. He argues this violated his rights to fair process and equal treatment and asks whether he must prove harm; his petition was distributed for a conference. |
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Civil Rights
- Why compared
- Reviewed Civil Rights tags connect these current-term public cases.
Related
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.