Justices reject Texas college official's claims over censure
A unanimous Supreme Court has ruled against an elected public college official in Texas who complained his colleagues’ censure of his actions violated his free speech rights
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 unanimous Supreme Court ruled Thursday against an elected public college official in Texas who complained that his colleagues' censure of his actions violated his free speech rights.
The justices had stepped into a yearslong dispute between the Houston Community College board of trustees and one of its members, Dave Wilson. The board oversees various community colleges in Texas.
Wilson has sued his colleagues on several occasions, arranged for robocalls against some and even hired a private investigator to try to prove another didn't live in the district she represents, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in his opinion for the court.
In 2018, the board adopted a resolution of censure against Wilson, calling his conduct “not only inappropriate, but reprehensible.” The censure followed an earlier reprimand from the board. Wilson amended one of his lawsuits to challenge the censure.
But Gorsuch wrote that a “purely verbal censure” of a colleague is not a First Amendment violation.
“Doubtless, by invoking its ‘censure’ authority in the second resolution the Board added a measure of sting. But we cannot see how that alone changed the equation and materially inhibited Mr. Wilson’s ability to speak freely,” Gorsuch wrote, calling the court's decision a narrow one.
A trial court had dismissed Wilson's claim, but an appellate panel reinstated it, leading to the Supreme Court case.