Free Speech Arguments – Can School Boards Censor Parents for Harsh Criticism of School Officials? (Moms for Liberty v. Wilson County Board of Education)

The Free Speech Arguments Podcast brings you oral arguments from important First Amendment free political speech cases across the country. Find us on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

October 29, 2024   •  By IFS Staff   •    •  

Episode 20: Moms for Liberty v. Wilson County Board of Education

Moms for Liberty – Wilson County, TN, et al. v. Wilson County Board of Education, et al., argued before Circuit Judges Jane Branstetter Stranch, Amul R. Thapar, and Eric E. Murphy in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on October 29, 2024. Argued by Brett R. Nolan, Senior Attorney, Institute for Free Speech (on behalf of Moms for Liberty – Wilson County, TN, et al.) and Christopher C. Hayden (on behalf of the Wilson County Board of Education, et al.).

*Note: a full transcript of the argument may be found under “resources” at the bottom of the page

Statement of Issues, from the Opening Brief for the Appellants:

1. Whether Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the Wilson County Board of Education’s policy requiring that speakers announce their address during the Board’s public-comment period violates the First Amendment.

2. Whether Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the Wilson County Board of Education’s policy prohibiting “abusive” speech during its public-comment period violates the First Amendment.

3. Whether Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the Wilson County Board of Education’s requirement that individuals who want to speak on non-agenda items during the public-comment period prove their comments are “in the public interest” violates the First Amendment.

4. Whether the Wilson County Board of Education’s partial voluntary cessation moots Plaintiffs’ challenges to the Board’s policies.

5. Whether the Wilson County Board of Education’s partial voluntary cessation prevents a finding of irreparable harm.

6. Whether Plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction against the address rule, the abusive-speech rule, and the public-interest rule.

Resources:

(Note: The transcript was automatically generated from Apple Podcasts. We have added speaker names, but the transcript has not been verified by a human. Please excuse any typos or inaccuracies resulting from the automatically generated transcription.)

Listen to the argument here:

     

The Institute for Free Speech promotes and defends the political speech rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government guaranteed by the First Amendment. If you’re enjoying the Free Speech Arguments podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on your preferred podcast platform.

IFS Staff

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap