Ruling Reinstates Lawsuit Over ‘Black Lives Matter’ School Posters

A federal lawsuit filed by Lakeville School District parents, minors and taxpayers concerned about “Black Lives Matter” posters in schools has been reinstated by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court agreed that the plaintiffs had a credible claim of unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination when the district also refused to display “All Lives Matter” and “Blue Lives Matter” posters.

After the murder of George Floyd, teachers in Independent School District 194 requested permission to hang “Black Lives Matter” (BLM) posters in their classrooms. The district’s superintendent explained in an email that approving the teachers’ request would violate district policy, which prohibits employees from engaging in conduct that is intended to, or could reasonably be perceived as, supporting or opposing specific political issues or candidates.

Through December 2020, four school board meetings and work sessions were largely devoted to discussions about race. During those meetings, outspoken community members urged district administrators to ignore the district’s policies. Others remained staunchly opposed to the “Black Lives Matter” message.

Lakeville parent Bob Cajune asked the district to allow “All Lives Matter” and “Blue Lives Matter” posters and T-shirts in district schools, but the district’s capital services director responded that the “slogans were created specifically in opposition to the Black Lives Matter movement” and “ignore the struggles that Black students have faced in our school buildings.”

Cajune and other named plaintiffs filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the district and its superintendent, alleging that they violated the free speech clause of the First Amendment by rejecting posters and T-shirts with the slogans “All Lives Matter” and “Blue Lives Matter.”

“(D)ine-year-old children in ISD 194 understand this,” the complaint states.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, in a 2023 ruling authored by Judge Jerry Blackwell, ruled that BLM posters constitute government speech that is immune from First Amendment challenge.

“From the summer following Brown v. Board of Education347 U.S. 483 (1954), public schools have played a critical role in preparing our children to live harmoniously in an increasingly multicultural and diverse nation through an integrated educational environment,” Blackwell wrote. “School boards…are charged with creating an educational environment that prepares young minds to be contributing members of our diverse society. Whether the District has achieved its intended goals under the Inclusive Poster Series is a question that its residents will answer.”

“But whether the posters are government speech is a question for the courts to answer, and in this case the Court answers in the affirmative. Plaintiffs’ views were presented, considered, and not accepted by the Circuit,” Blackwell added.

On appeal, the plaintiffs argued that the content and meaning of the BLM posters were determined by private individuals and that the district simply gave the posters its stamp of approval. In addition, the plaintiffs argued that the district created a limited public forum by allowing private individuals to display BLM posters on school walls.

“The poster series was designed to convey the private views of certain members of the community,” argued James Dickey, senior counsel at the Upper Midwest Law Center. “These teachers and staff are expressing their private views by making the decision to hang the poster, but of course only if they agree with the private activists who originally proposed the posters in the first place.”

The district argued that any reasonable member of the public would understand that the district, not private entities, was sending a message of support to its students. “The district had a multi-month discussion about equity, created a series of posters, and then the school board president specifically stood behind that series of posters, saying, ‘We stand for this, we stand for Black Lives Matter,’” said Zachary Cronen, a partner at Squires, Waldspurger & Mace. “The district here listened to its constituents, both for and against, and decided that they wanted to adopt this.”

Judge Raymond Gruender wrote for the 8th Circuit that “the District deferred to the wishes of private individuals after facing a backlash from community members.” He further disagreed with the district, saying that because individual teachers can decide whether to display the poster, the district cedes control to private entities.

After determining that sufficient facts had been presented to support a credible inference that the BLM posters were private expression, the appellate court agreed with the plaintiffs that the District created a limited public forum by allowing private individuals to display BLM posters when it had previously restricted the display of such posters. Accordingly, the court held that the District discriminated against viewpoint speech by disallowing “All Lives Matter” and “Blue Lives Matter” on the grounds that the phrases were specifically created to oppose “Black Lives Matter.”

“This is a huge victory for free speech and a major blow to the government’s efforts to pass off private activist speech as its own,” said James Dickey, senior counsel at the Upper Midwest Law Center. “The government cannot tip the scales in favor of Black Lives Matter activists against all other speech on racial issues in America.”

In a statement, the school district said, “Lakeville Area Schools has received the decision of the 8th Circuit Court in the matter Cajune et al vs. Lakeville Area Schools case. The district is currently reviewing the court’s ruling and considering next steps.”