A federal judge has ruled that a St. Charles County school district was engaging in viewpoint discrimination when it selectively enforced a no-advertising policy during a school board meeting’s public commentary.
Plaintiffs Christopher Brooks, Ken Gontarz, and Katherine Rash sued the Francis Howell School District on Feb. 11 seeking an injunction, declaratory relief, and nominal damages after they were banned from speaking about their political action committee (PAC) at a school board meeting.
“The Court finds that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they have a fair chance of prevailing on the merits of their claim, that they will suffer irreparable injury absent a preliminary injunction, that the balance of harms favors an injunction, and that protecting constitutional rights serves the public interest,” wrote Eastern District of Missouri Judge Stephen Clark in his April 12 Memorandum and Opinion.
The plaintiffs settled after the school district agreed to pay $70,000 to the Institute for Free Speech in Washington, D.C., which brought the suit on behalf of the plaintiffs.
“We believe we would have won had we gone to trial,” said Del Kolde, senior attorney at the Institute for Free Speech in Washington. “It would have been very time-consuming and expensive also for the school district. I don't feel sorry for them, it was a reasonable result and one that our clients supported.”
Underlying the settlement is an October 21, 2021, school board meeting where Gontarz and Rash were warned against exercising their constitutional right to free speech in mentioning that more information could be found on their website, FrancisHowellFamilies.com, about their political action committee that supports conservative school board candidates.
“What I think is particularly interesting here is that the advertising policies that the Francis Howell School District used were a model policy or set of model policies that were pushed out by the Missouri School Boards Association,” Kolde told the St. Louis Record.
Judge Clark’s opinion, which was issued on the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, is limited.
“Other Missouri federal courts are going to give this opinion a lot of weight, other district courts in the circuit are going to give this opinion a lot of weight too and even courts outside of Missouri but they are not bound by it,” Kolde said. “If it had come down from the Supreme Court or the Eighth Circuit, which is in the appeal court that includes Missouri, then it would be binding.”
The St. Louis Post Dispatch reported that the school district’s insurer will pay for the settlement.
"By making people pay attorneys fees and pay a settlement, it's a message to school district officials, their attorneys, and their insurance companies that you have to let people speak," Kolde added. "You don't have to agree with what they're saying, but you have to let them express their opinion."