Hardeman v. Chrysler Credit Corp.

recognizing that not all constitutional harms are synonymous with irreparable harm, and that the mere assertion of a First Amendment right does not automatically require a finding of irreparable harm; rather, the movant must show a “chilling” effect on protected activity | recognizing that not all constitutional harms are synonymous with irreparable harm and that mere assertion of a First Amendment right does not automatically require a finding of irreparable harm; rather, the movant must show a “chilling” effect on protected activity | relying on Alexander to find that Title VII not subject to waiver through arbitration clause | holding the presumption to be constitutional | “Alexander makes clear that Congress intended the right in employment discrimination cases to have access to judicial remedies to outbalance the federal policy favoring arbitration.” | movant must make “clear showing of immediate irreparable injury”