Whether state officials may disclaim enforcement authority over a law to avoid federal court review of the law's constitutionality

Minnesota enacted a law prohibiting employers from requiring employees to attend meetings in which the employer discusses its views on political or religious matters – otherwise known as “captive audience” meetings – and requiring them to post a notice written by the State notifying employees of this law. The law clearly violates this Court’s precedent declaring that employers have a F irst Amendment right to communicate their views to employees. Petitioners brought suit in federal court against Respondents who maintain enforcement authority over the law. Reversing the district court, the Eighth Circuit ordered dismissal of Petitioners’ suit, thereby conflicting with this Court’s holding in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson , 595 U.S. 30 (2021), and in further conflict with the Fifth, Sixth , Ninth , Tenth and Eleventh Circuits. The question presented is whether state officials may disclaim enforcement authority over a law to avoid federal court review of the law’s constitutionality where the statute places clear enforcement authority over, or an obligation to enforce, the law with those state officials.