on the stand. He noted that numerous Black men had been wrongfully prosecuted at the time and cited the country's history of lynchings. Less than four months after the case was decided, North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper pardoned Long. Peltier v. Charter Day School, Inc. (4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) In a 10–6 decision, joined by Judge Wynn, the full court held that a public charter school was a state actor for the purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Senior Judge Barbara Milano Keenan, writing for the majority, also concluded that the school’s dress code, which "requires female students to wear skirts to school based on the view that girls are 'fragile vessels' deserving of 'gentle' treatment by boys," plainly violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Wynn penned a concurrence joined by four other judges critiquing policy arguments raised by some of the dissenting judges. He dismissed concerns that the majority's Equal Protection holding would threaten historically Black colleges and universities, pointing out that just because an "institution is historically Black . . . does not mean that school is currently engaging in racial discrimination." He also rejected the dissenting judges' argument that "subjecting schools like Charter Day to the demands of the Constitution" will stifle "educational progress," noting that "[t]wo hundred and fifty years of innovation and ingenuity—enabled by our American constitutional system—say otherwise." Nelson v. Freeland, 349 N.C. 615 (1998) During his tenure on the Supreme Court of North Carolina, Wynn authored an opinion abolishing the longstanding invitee/licensee framework for evaluating premises-liability claims and replacing it with a new standard under which property owners owe a duty of reasonable care to all lawful visitors. United States v. Graham, 824 F.3d 421 (4th Cir. 2016) (en banc) Wynn wrote an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, arguing that cell site location information is not voluntarily conveyed by cell phone users and, therefore, is protected by the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court subsequently agreed. Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018). International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 857 F.3d 554 (4th Cir. 2017) (en banc) Wynn wrote a concurring opinion contending that President Trump's "travel ban" exceeded the President's authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act because it denied entry to a class of aliens on the basis of invidious discrimination. Wynn's opinion was grounded in the interpretive principle that absent a clear statement by