Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Van Tatenhove dismisses a police officer's federal claims contending his right to freely associate and travel had been violated when the department continued to circulate press releases stating he had attended the deadly January 6 rally that sought to overthrow the election for Donald Trump by attacking the capital, even though he claims he had only been in D.C. at that time to enjoy a site-seeing trip with his family. The officer's right to travel had not been infringed since he had not been punished for going to D.C. with his family, and his right to associate with his wife had not become the issue when she posted pictures of herself near the rally; instead, he had been investigated and transferred based on his own presence in the country's capital, and nothing in the claim contends he had been transferred due to his marital relationship. Due process claims concerning loss of protected property fail because the officer "merely alleges that he was transferred from a supervisory position to a position without supervisory responsibilities—not that he was removed, suspended, or reduced in grade or pay." The decision did not deprive him of a property interest, and he was not entitled to a hearing.