Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Moms for Liberty - Wilson County, Tennessee, et al. Wilson Coounty Schools, et al.

Date: 09-15-2025

Case Number: 3:23-CV-211

Judge: Eli J. Richardson

Court: United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee (Davidson County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:



Click Here For The Best Nashville Civil Rights Lawyer Directory





Defendant's Attorney:



Click Here For The Best Nashville Insurance Defense Lawyer Directory





Description:
Nashville, Tennessee Civil rights lawyers represented the Plaintiffs First Amendment violation.



The Wilson County Board of Education is charged with administering public schools in

Wilson County, Tennessee. In line with its Policy Manual, the Board holds monthly school

board meetings. Tennessee law dictates that the Board's Chair preside over all school board

meetings, Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-205(a)(1), and that, absent state or constitutional law

instructing otherwise, those meetings shall be open to the public, id. § 8-44-102(a).



The Board routinely hears public comment during its meetings. To provide public

comment, individuals must comply with Policy 1.404, which specifies that "[a]ny matter relating

to the operation of the school system may be appealed to the Board.” R. 17-4, Ex. B, PageID

131. However, to facilitate settlement of all matters "at the lowest level of responsibility,” the

Board "will not hear complaints or concerns which have not advanced through the proper

administrative procedure from the point of origin.” Id. "If all [the] steps of the administrative

procedure have been pursued and there is still a desire to appeal to the Board, the matter shall be

referred in writing to the office of the Director of Schools and the Board shall determine whether

to hear the appeal.” Id.



Policy 1.404 also dictates how the Board determines whether to hear public comments

and provides three avenues through which a member of the public may address the Board. The

first avenue permits a person "desiring to appear before the Board [to] . . . submit a written

request with descriptive materials to the office of the Director of Schools ten (10) working days

before the scheduled regular [s]chool [b]oard meeting.” Id. "If the request is approved,” an item

will be placed on the Board's meeting agenda and the person will be allotted time to speak. Id.

The second avenue permits a would-be speaker wishing to provide comment on a topic already

on the agenda to "sign up . . . or make a request to any Board Member before the beginning of

[any] Board [m]eeting” after the agenda is published. Id. The third and final avenue allows the

Chair or another Board Member to recognize a person "for remarks to the Board [on a non

agenda item] if he/she determines that such is in the public interest.” Id. This public-interest

provision applies only to speakers who failed to meet the requirements of the first two avenues

for addressing the Board. Regardless of the avenue pursued, Policy 1.404 also requires each



speaker to state his or her name and address when speaking to the Board.

At the beginning of each public comment period, the Chair reads aloud from a script that

includes additional rules for addressing the Board. Generally, the Chair also offers to reread the

script before each speaker addresses the Board. The iteration of the script at issue here stated:

Please state your name, address, and subject of your presentation. Your topic

must be specific in nature dealing with only policies and procedures. We reserve

the right to terminate remarks at any time if you fail to adhere to the guidelines or

[if] your comments become abusive to an individual [B]oard [M]ember[,] the

[B]oard as a whole[,] . . . the [D]irector of [S]chools[,] or any employee of the

school system. . . . At the conclusion of your remarks, the [B]oard and the

Director of Schools shall have the privilege to ask questions.



Neither Policy 1.404 nor any other formal Board policy contains the

restriction on abusive comments included in the Chair's script.
Outcome:
Preliminary injunction denied.



Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of Moms for Liberty - Wilson County, Tennessee, et al. Wilso...?

The outcome was: Preliminary injunction denied. Affirmed

Which court heard Moms for Liberty - Wilson County, Tennessee, et al. Wilso...?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee (Davidson County), TN. The presiding judge was Eli J. Richardson.

Who were the attorneys in Moms for Liberty - Wilson County, Tennessee, et al. Wilso...?

Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Nashville Civil Rights Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Nashville Insurance Defense Lawyer Directory.

When was Moms for Liberty - Wilson County, Tennessee, et al. Wilso... decided?

This case was decided on September 15, 2025.