A significant legal development materialized last week when a California federal judge chose against dismissing the lawsuit enacted by U.S Representatives Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor-Greene against the cities of Anaheim and Riverside, California. Gaetz and Greene, both Republicans, have asserted that their First Amendment rights were breached when their scheduled political rally was called off due to their political views. Link to the dismissal
In July 2021, the pair intended to conduct a rally across several California cities, Laguna Hills, Riverside and Anaheim among them. However, the event was cancelled in each city following a widespread public backlash to the proposed event. Falling back onto a contingency, Gaetz and Greene ultimately executed a protest outside of Riverside City Hall.
In the ensuing months, the two U.S representatives filed a lawsuit against Riverside, Anaheim and several activist groups that had rallied against the event, including the NAACP. They alleged that their rights had been violated in line with 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which offers provision for individuals to sue local and state governments for infringing on civil rights. The lawsuit against the activist organizations relied on 42 U.S.C. § 1985, otherwise known as the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which clearly prohibits conspiracies that impede civil rights.
Judge Hernán D. Vera greenlighted the lawsuit against the cities while promptly dismissing the claims held against the various activist groups. He concluded that Gaetz and Greene had “adequately allege[d]” that the event cancellations were solely based on viewpoint discrimination, an act that contravenes the First Amendment to the US Constitution. On one hand, Riverside owned the convention center in question, with its mayor reportedly “pushing” for the cancellation of the event. Anaheim, on the other hand, did not own the theatre, but one of its officials allegedly threatened to jeopardize the theater’s permit if the event proceeded.
However, Gaetz and Greene were sternly chastised by Vera for implicating nine civil rights groups in federal court for speaking out against their event. He concluded that their claim was fundamentally flawed as it pointed to no evidence of collusion among the various groups nor any provocation towards Gaetz and Greene’s supporters. Furthermore, he described the claim as a baseless conspiracy theory and a misguided attempt to level political scores against civic organizations.
The claim against the cities is now set to advance to the discovery phase and potentially to trial, barring a potential dispute settlement or a successful motion for summary judgment.
First Amendment rights and freedom of speech continue to be a frequent source of public debate and litigation in the United States. Indeed, the US Supreme Court is currently deliberating over several cases that involve free speech, notably NRA v. Vullo and Netchoice.