Whether Heck v. Humphrey bars § 1983 claims seeking purely prospective relief where the plaintiff has been punished under a law challenged as unconstitutional

Gabriel Olivier is a Christian who feels called to share the gospel with his fellow citizens. After being arrested and fined for violating an ordinance target-ing “protests” outside a public amphitheater, Olivier brought a § 1983 suit under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to declare the ordinance unconstitu-tional and enjoin its enforcement against him in the future. The Fifth Circuit, applying its precedent construing this Court’s decision in Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477 (1994), held that Olivier’s prior conviction barred his § 1983 suit because even the prospective relief it seeks would necessarily undermine his prior conviction. The Fifth Circuit acknowledged the “fric-tion” between its decision and those of this Court and other circuits. Over vigorous dissents, the Fifth Cir-cuit denied rehearing en banc by one vote. The questions presented are: 1. Whether, as the Fifth Circuit holds in conflict with the Ninth and Tenth Circuits, this Court’s decision in Heck v. Humphrey bars § 1983 claims seeking purely prospective relief wh ere the plaintiff has been punished before under the law challenged as uncon-stitutional. 2. Whether, as the Fifth Circuit and at least four others hold in conflict with five other circuits, Heck v. Humphrey bars § 1983 claims by plaintiffs even where they never had access to federal habeas relief.