The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has vacated a prior ruling that dismissed Nashville attorney Daniel Horwitz’s challenge to a now-rescinded local court rule restricting attorneys’ public statements about ongoing cases. This development follows the Middle District of Tennessee’s decision to amend its local rules, effectively removing the contentious provision.
In 2022, Horwitz faced a gag order prohibiting him from discussing a wrongful death lawsuit against CoreCivic, a private prison operator. The order also mandated the deletion of several social media posts critical of the company. Horwitz, represented by the Institute for Justice, filed a federal lawsuit in October 2024, arguing that the local rule infringed upon his First Amendment rights. ([reason.com](https://reason.com/2025/05/19/federal-court-scraps-rule-that-gagged-tennessee-civil-rights-attorney-from-criticizing-a-private-prison/?utm_source=openai))
Initially, the district court dismissed Horwitz’s lawsuit, stating he lacked standing to challenge the rule. However, while the appeal was pending, the Middle District of Tennessee proposed and subsequently adopted amendments to its local rules, eliminating the provision that presumed attorneys’ out-of-court statements were prejudicial. ([ij.org](https://ij.org/press-release/victory-tennessee-court-scraps-attorney-gag-order-rule-following-federal-lawsuit/?utm_source=openai))
With the rule change in place, the Sixth Circuit found the original dismissal moot and vacated the prior decision. This outcome underscores the dynamic interplay between legal challenges and procedural reforms within the judiciary.