Whether a state actor can insulate unconstitutional policies and practices from judicial review

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Over two months before his scheduled execution date, Abel Ochoa contacted Texas prison officials to request permission to film an interview to submit as part of his request for clemency. Although they routinely permit members of the media to film Texas death row inmates, the prison officials refused to allow Mr. Ochoa to film a clemency interview unless he first secured a court order. Mr. Ochoa sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the prison’s policies and practices interfered with his clemency process in violation of his constitutional and statutory rights. To remedy these violations, Mr. Ochoa requested declaratory and injunctive relief, and a court order to permit the filming. Both courts below declined to stay the execution despite Mr. Ochoa not yet receiving complete relief. The questions presented are: 1. Whether a state actor can insulate unconstitutional policies and practices from judicial review by asserting that the upcoming execution of the plaintiff serves as an irrefutable endpoint to any harm, rendering the state actor’s policies and practices non-justiciable. 2. Whether a state actor violates a death row inmate’s due process rights when it interferes in the clemency process by preventing the condemned individual from submitting evidence to support his request for clemency. ii