Court: No lawsuit immunity for Michigan official who had rifle during online meeting
A lawsuit can go forward against a Michigan official who flashed a rifle during a public meeting over video conference
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A lawsuit can go forward against a Michigan official who flashed a rifle during a public meeting over video conference, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.
Patricia MacIntosh is suing Ron Clous, alleging he tried to silence her right to free speech when he displayed the rifle during a 2021 meeting of Grand Traverse County commissioners.
Clous has no governmental immunity at this stage of the litigation, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in a 2-1 opinion.
“Virtually smirking and displaying a high-powered rifle at someone during a tension-filled public meeting is pregnant with dangerous meaning,” said judges Jane Stranch and Stephanie Dawkins Davis.
The incident occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic when the county board met over video conference. During the public comment period, MacIntosh urged commissioners to make a statement opposing anti-government militia groups, a few weeks after the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.
That's when Clous, a commissioner who was participating from home, left the screen and returned with a rifle.
In response to the lawsuit, an attorney for Clous argued that displaying the rifle was his own “expressive conduct” protected by the Constitution. But the appeals court said it could be considered an “adverse action.”
Clous didn't seek reelection in 2022 and is no longer a county commissioner.
In a dissent, Judge Jeffrey Sutton said no legal precedent fits to keep MacIntosh's free speech retaliation lawsuit alive.
“Think of what happened,” he said. “A side view of Commissioner Clous’s lawfully possessed rifle. In that official’s own home. For a few seconds. During a virtual Board of Commissioners meeting. With everyone participating from the safety of their own homes.”
___
Follow Ed White at http://twitter.com/edwritez