Forced to resign? Cop says video was ‘satire’ and a ‘parody of BLM protests’

The Eighth Circuit revived a First Amendment retaliation claim filed by a police officer who said he was forced to resign over a video that criticized the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement.

The city’s police department created a group text to keep all officers informed about BLM protests in the area. While the thread was intended for professional purposes, police officers regularly shared “unrelated” content, the complaint alleged.

Backlash over video shared in group text

For example, the plaintiff shared a clip from an animated sitcom called “Paradise PD.” The video featured a Black police officer who accidentally shot himself with a media headline stating, “another innocent [B]lack man shot by a cop.” Someone in the department complained, and the chief of police threatened to open an investigation unless the plaintiff resigned. He did – and then he filed a lawsuit.

According to the plaintiff, “the video was satire and a parody of the BLM protests.” He said he shared it because it was critical of the protests. He said he was pushed out for exercising his speech rights.

The lower court dismissed his complaint, but on appeal, the Eighth Circuit reversed the ruling and remanded the case.

Generally, public employees, like the officer in this case, have free speech rights so long as they are speaking as private citizens rather than speaking pursuant to their official job duties, the court explained.

So the first task was deciding whether the plaintiff spoke as a private citizen or an employee.

Here, the court pointed out that the group text was “used to send both work-related and unrelated messages, and [the plaintiff’s] video was such an unrelated message.”

Moreover, because his official role in the group text was to share and respond to info “about local BLM protests, and not to share his personal views on BLM,” he was acting as a private citizen when he posted the video, the court added.

Next, the court looked at whether the officer’s speech involved a matter of public concern. Here, it did, the court decided. Even though the video didn’t specifically reference the BLM movement, it referenced a police officer shooting a Black man. “It is widely known that a central goal of BLM is to stop police brutality,” the Eighth Circuit noted.

In the appellate court’s view, the officer’s speech was made as a private citizen and involved a matter of public concern. As such, he plausibly alleged that his speech was protected by the First Amendment.

The Eighth Circuit remanded the case for further proceedings.

Bresnahan v. City of St. Peters, No. 21-3910, 2023 WL 310208 (8th Cir. 1/19/23).