MAGA death post fuels a First Amendment court fight

The Alachua County (Florida) School Board’s attempt to silence local father Jeremy Clepper during a public meeting is a textbook violation of his First Amendment rights, and he has a rock-solid legal case against them.

On July 31, Clepper stood up during a school board meeting to criticize Chairwoman Sarah Rockwell’s vile social media post celebrating the death of Hulk Hogan. The board responded by ordering his removal.

The board’s attempt to shut him down must face consequences or the First Amendment becomes just words on paper.

The board’s actions aren’t merely an unconstitutional attack on free speech — they expose a dangerous disregard for the Constitution and demand accountability.

Censored and removed

The controversy began when Rockwell posted on social media: “Good. One less MAGA in the world,” celebrating the death of the pro-wrestling icon known later in life for his conservative leanings. The now-deleted post sparked outrage, and Rockwell’s half-hearted apology — while refusing to resign — only fanned the flames.

At the July 31 school board meeting, Clepper took the podium during public comment to demand accountability. “You cheered for the death of MAGA,” he said, before calling on her to resign.

His remarks were passionate but protected speech, well within the bounds of a public forum. Instead of engaging, a board member ordered deputies to remove Clepper. The board backtracked only after their attorney intervened.

But the damage was done. The order was issued, the deputy began the process, and Clepper’s right to speak was actively threatened. This action was a deliberate attempt to censor a parent for his viewpoint.

Not Alachua’s first violation

This isn’t the first time the Alachua County School Board has trampled on free speech. On September 21, 2021, Ty Appiah, a father and Republican candidate for office, was removed by an armed deputy during a public school board meeting after calling for the termination of then-Superintendent Dr. Carlee Simon.

Appiah simply said, “Terminate Dr. Simon. She’s more focused on politics than our children,” before board member Leanetta McNealy, who still serves on the board, cut him off and declared, “Deputy. Escort him out.” Notably, both McNealy and Tina Certain, who ordered Clepper’s removal, were on the board in 2021 and voted against firing Dr. Simon in 2022.

Appiah’s case, still within Florida’s four-year statute of limitations for civil rights claims, shows a disturbing pattern of the board violating parents’ First Amendment rights when they challenge the status quo.

Clepper also has a strong legal case against the board, grounded in well-established Supreme Court precedent. Public school board meetings are “limited public forums,” where the government cannot discriminate against speech based on its content or viewpoint.

Legal precedent

In Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators’ Association, the Supreme Court clarified that in such forums, restrictions on speech must be viewpoint-neutral and narrowly tailored. Ordering Clepper’s removal because of his criticism of Rockwell’s political bias is textbook viewpoint discrimination, violating his First Amendment rights.

The Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Reed v. Town of Gilbert further strengthens Clepper’s case. The court held that content-based restrictions on speech — like targeting Clepper for his conservative-leaning critique — are subject to strict scrutiny, meaning the government must prove a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means.

The board’s attempt to eject Clepper fails this test. They had no compelling reason to silence him — his comments were within the scope of public comment, addressing a board member’s conduct that directly impacts the district’s trustworthiness.

Moreover, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals’ 2024 decision in Moms for Liberty v. Brevard Public Schools reinforces that school boards must protect free expression during public comment periods, regardless of the speaker’s perspective. The Alachua County School Board’s attempt to remove Clepper directly contradicts this precedent.

The First Amendment protects Jeremy Clepper’s right to respond in a public forum. School board meetings are designed for parents to voice concerns, especially about the conduct of elected officials. Clepper’s criticism of Rockwell was directly relevant to the board’s governance. Suppressing his speech because it challenged the chair’s actions is unfair and unconstitutional.

Florida fights back

Florida Education Commissioner Anastasios Kamoutsas didn’t mince words in his August 1 letter to Rockwell. He found “probable cause” that the board violated state law and the First Amendment, writing:

Since the Alachua County School Board has publicly failed to ensure free expression of all viewpoints during public comment, I have found probable cause that a violation of state law has occurred.

He added, “Not only did you allow a parent’s constitutional rights to be violated under your leadership, but the rest of the board stood by silently, failing to stop it.”

Kamoutsas recommended withholding the board’s salaries until they comply with the law, a rare and serious rebuke that underscores the gravity of their actions. This letter bolsters Clepper’s legal standing.

RELATED: School censorship backfires in costly free speech beatdown

Photo by paci77 via Getty Images

The commissioner’s findings align with federal case law, signaling that the board’s conduct was not only wrong but actionable. Clepper could pursue a federal civil rights lawsuit, which would let him seek damages from officials for violating his constitutional rights.

Clepper’s legal case is straightforward. The board violated his First Amendment rights by attempting to suppress his speech based on its content. He can point to Perry, Reed, and Moms for Liberty to argue that the board’s actions were unconstitutional.

The commissioner’s letter adds weight, showing that even state officials recognize the violation. Clepper could seek injunctive relief to prevent future censorship, declaratory relief affirming his rights, and potentially damages for the harm caused by the board’s actions.

The Constitution doesn’t play favorites. Rockwell had her say, vile as it was. Clepper deserved his, too. The board’s attempt to shut him down must face consequences, or the First Amendment becomes just words on paper. Parents everywhere should take note: When government officials trample your rights, you have the power to fight back in court.