A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of the Brevard County chapter of Moms for Liberty in a case challenging school board policies that restricted speech at public meetings.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the policies, which targeted “abusive,” “obscene,” and “personally directed” speech, violated the First Amendment rights of parents and community members.
Read: Two Florida Men Sentenced To Federal Prison For Robbing Mail Carriers At Gunpoint
The lawsuit, filed in 2021, stemmed from incidents where individuals were prevented from speaking at school board meetings due to the vague and overly broad nature of the policies.
The court found that these policies failed to provide clear definitions of prohibited speech, leading to arbitrary enforcement and suppression of dissenting viewpoints.
One example cited in the ruling involved a speaker who was interrupted for criticizing the board’s COVID-19 masking policy as a “ploy to silence opposition.” The court deemed this restriction unacceptable, emphasizing that even offensive speech is protected under the First Amendment.
In another instance, a Moms for Liberty member was prevented from reading aloud from a school library book containing sexually explicit content, despite its relevance to the discussion. The court held that this restriction also violated the First Amendment, as it hindered the ability of individuals to fully express their concerns about the book’s content.
This ruling is a significant win for free speech advocates and highlights the importance of clear and narrowly tailored policies for public forums like school board meetings. It also underscores the ongoing tension surrounding school boards and their role in navigating controversial issues, particularly those related to parental rights and educational content.
Key Points of the Ruling:
- “Abusive” speech: The court found the policy’s lack of a clear definition of “abusive” speech allowed for arbitrary enforcement and suppression of dissenting opinions.
- “Obscene” speech: The court determined that the policy was used to prevent a Moms for Liberty member from reading aloud from a school library book containing sexually explicit content, even though the content was relevant to the discussion.
- “Personally directed” speech: While the majority opinion found this policy unconstitutional, one judge dissented, arguing that the revised version of the policy was permissible.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Android Users: Download our free app to stay up-to-date on the latest news.
Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.