Delma Jackson alleged that Georgia Department of Corrections officials terminated her prison visits with her husband in retaliation for her public criticism of prison conditions; the officials also cited security concerns arising from his role in a hunger strike. The district court granted the officials qualified immunity for the initial period but denied summary judgment for the period after the strike ended, and the officials appealed. The Eleventh Circuit held that the termination was one decision made when officials sent letters on July 19, 2012, so immunity turned on the facts and law then known, even though the ban continued afterward. Because the record supported legitimate security concerns alongside a possible retaliatory motive, and existing circuit law protected officials acting on mixed motives absent a clearly established violation, the officials were entitled to qualified immunity for the entire period. The court reversed the denial of immunity and remanded for entry of judgment for the officials. Judge Hinkle concurred in the result but disagreed with the majority’s cross-appeal analysis; Judge Martin dissented, reasoning that the ongoing failure to restore visitation could amount to continuing retaliation after the hunger strike ended.