🚨 JUDGE DISMISSED MY CASE. HERE’S WHY THE 9TH CIRCUIT IS GOING TO REVERSE IT. 🚨

I need to tell you all something important — and I need you to pay close attention because this is a MASTERCLASS in how the law actually works.

On August 6, 2026, District Judge Adrienne Nelson dismissed my federal civil rights case, Wilson v. City of Hood River. In her three-page order, she adopted the Magistrate’s recommendation and dismissed all five of my constitutional claims. But here is what she wrote that stopped me in my tracks:

She said she was adopting the ruling “regardless of the arguments made in the contested materials.”

Read that again. The judge said she was dismissing my case REGARDLESS of my arguments. She didn’t engage with my 66 pages of objections. She didn’t address my 14 disputed facts. She didn’t explain how she could grant summary judgment when the law says you MUST rule in favor of the non-moving party — which was ME — when facts are in dispute.

Now here is where it gets powerful. 🔥

THE RICE CASE — YOUR BLUEPRINT FOR UNDERSTANDING WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

In 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided a case called Rice v. Morehouse. Here are the facts:

Lee Arthur Rice was stopped by police. He verbally declined to hand over his documents. He asked to speak to a supervisor. Officers arrested him for “obstruction and delay.” They threw him to the ground and handcuffed him. His criminal charges were later DISMISSED after a court found the stop was unlawful.

Sound familiar? 👀

The district court granted summary judgment for the officers — just like Judge Nelson did in my case.

The Ninth Circuit REVERSED IT. Here is exactly what they said:

“The right to be free from the application of non-trivial force for engaging in mere passive resistance was clearly established.”

In other words — you cannot handcuff a man for verbally refusing to comply and asking questions. That is passive resistance. That is protected. And a jury — NOT a judge — decides whether what happened was constitutional.

NOW COMPARE THAT TO MY CASE

I was standing on a PUBLIC SIDEWALK. I was not driving. I was not the subject of a traffic stop. I verbally challenged the officers’ authority and asked for their badge numbers — a clearly protected First Amendment right. I was handcuffed within seconds. Officer Delancy told me I was being detained for “obstruction of justice” — a charge that does not even meet the legal elements under Oregon law for what I was doing.

The same facts. The same invalid charge. The same handcuffing for passive resistance. The same district court dismissal.

The Ninth Circuit already told us what happens next. They already wrote the answer in Rice v. Morehouse. They already reversed it once. They will reverse it again.

WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOU

This is not just about my case. This is about EVERY person who has ever been stopped, handcuffed, or arrested for simply asking questions, asserting their rights, or verbally refusing to comply with an unlawful command.

The Ninth Circuit has already ruled that this conduct is protected. The law is on the books. The precedent exists. What Judge Nelson did — dismissing my case in three pages without engaging with a single one of my arguments — is the exact kind of judicial error that the Ninth Circuit was created to correct.

I am filing my Rule 59(e) Motion to give Judge Nelson one more opportunity to correct her own error. And if she does not — the Ninth Circuit is next. And we already know how that story ends. ⚖️

THE LESSON FOR EVERY WISEDOMIAN

When you are in a federal civil rights case and the district court dismisses you — that is NOT the end. That is the beginning of the appellate process. The Ninth Circuit reviews summary judgment de novo — which means they look at the ENTIRE record fresh, with zero deference to the district judge. They will read the same facts I laid out. They will read Rice v. Morehouse. And they will see that the district court committed the same reversible error.

Know the law. Know the precedent. Know your rights. And never stop fighting.

Power Inherent in the People. Always. 👑

— Cameron James Wilson

Wilson v. City of Hood River, et al.

Case No. 3:24-cv-02033-JR

U.S. District Court, District of Oregon

#OperationWisedome #PowerInherentInThePeople #CivilRights #Section1983 #NinthCircuit #RiceVMorehouse #SummaryJudgment #KnowYourRights #FightBack #ProSe #FederalCourt #FirstAmendment #FourthAmendment #JusticeWillPrevail