Does a person or entity have immunity from prosecution under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when rights that have been secured by the United States Constitution have been violated by said person or entity acting under the color of state law?

Should the Ninth Circuit have appointed counsel to sit before it for a comprehensive debate - on petitioner's behalf - to discover this case's hidden value?

Is it possible that the District Court did not apply the "serious questions" test, thereby making an error of law in denying the TRO in this urgent situation?

Was it a case of misconstruing the facts that lead to the legal conclusion in this matter?

Does a person or entity have immunity from prosecution under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when rights secured by the U.S. Constitution have been violated by said person or entity acting under color of state law?