In two successive decrees issued on October 1st and 2nd, the prefect of the Bas-Rhin region in France banned gatherings near a number of high schools in Strasbourg and the Bas-Rhin area until Tuesday, October 6. These restrictions were challenged by several organizations, including the League for Human Rights, Alternative étudiante Strasbourg, the Federation of Student Unions, the French Bar Association, and the Judicial Officers' Union. They filed an urgent legal request (référé) with the Strasbourg Administrative Court on October 2nd and 5th, seeking to have the decrees reviewed. On the evening of Tuesday, October 5th, the court decided to suspend the October 2nd decree, which had extended the restrictions from the earlier decree. The earlier decree had already expired, making the October 2nd decree invalid on its own. The lawyers representing the organizations argued that the restrictions were too vague and could lead to the detention of students and their inclusion in a judicial database. They described the situation as part of a broader crackdown on a national student movement, which they said involved "disproportionate violence" and "chained arrests." They also pointed out that some of the high schools affected were near the planned route of a student demonstration set for Tuesday, October 6, starting at 2 p.m. During the court hearing, the prefect's office argued that the demonstration route had been officially declared, so the areas around the high schools should not have been subject to gathering restrictions. However, the judge overseeing the case emphasized that the right to demonstrate is a fundamental freedom in France. According to the judge, restrictions on gatherings could only be imposed as a last resort if there was a clear risk of public disorder. The prefect, however, provided only a general press release from their office and three news articles to support the claim of such a risk. The judge also criticized the lack of clarity in the decree, which applied to "all individuals near high schools," a definition she found too vague. She concluded that the decree violated the fundamental rights to freedom of demonstration and expression and ordered its suspension. The ruling highlights the tension between public safety concerns and the protection of civil liberties in France.