A Wisconsin mom and conservative activist has received a free speech case after being sued for defamation over social media posts criticizing her faculty district’s “woke” priorities.
Scarlett Johnson, a pacesetter in Mothers for Liberty’s Wisconsin chapter, was sued by Mary MacCudden, a former English trainer and “Social Justice Coordinator” for the Mequon-Thiensville College District (MTSD), after Johnson made important posts on social media in October 2022.
Johnson posted a screenshot of MacCudden’s LinkedIn profile and wrote, “Why the hell am I paying for a ‘Social Justice Coordinator’ in my faculty district?” She added, “That is simply what @mtschools wants; extra woke, White ladies w/ a god complicated. Thanks, White savior.”
In different posts, Johnson described DEI specialists as “woke lunatics” and “bullies” who “bully” dad and mom “into silence and compliance.”
MacCudden filed a defamation lawsuit in 2022.
The circuit courtroom allowed elements of the case to proceed, however Johnson and her attorneys on the Wisconsin Institute for Regulation and Liberty (WILL) appealed the choice.
WILL argued that Johnson’s feedback have been “run-of-the-mill social media posts” which can be protected by the First Modification.
On Tuesday, the Wisconsin Courtroom of Appeals sided with Johnson, ruling that her feedback have been opinions, not factual statements that could possibly be confirmed true or false, and subsequently couldn’t be thought of defamatory.
“We conclude that Johnson’s statements don’t represent defamation. Thus, we reverse and remand for the circuit courtroom to enter abstract judgment in Johnson’s favor,” the appeals courtroom discovered.
Phrases like “bully” and “lunatic” are subjective, the courtroom argued, whereas the phrases “woke,” “White savior” and “god complicated” are “imprecise and should not have a transparent which means or definition,” it mentioned.
One decide dissented, saying the posts recognized MacCudden by identify and may need implied undisclosed details {that a} jury ought to contemplate.
Johnson mentioned she noticed the lawsuit as an effort to silence her and different dad and mom who spoke out in opposition to DEI applications.
She recalled going through an analogous defamation declare simply days earlier than a 2021 faculty board election, calling it a politically timed try and intimidate her.
“I felt I needed to battle again on this case. It couldn’t be like the opposite. I needed to rise up as a result of this is able to by no means cease,” she informed Fox Information Digital. “They’d hold going after dad and mom like me.”
She added that she hopes the ruling encourages different dad and mom to talk out in opposition to “radical ideologies” in public faculties with out worry of being sued.
“This units authorized precedent,” she mentioned. “Dad and mom all over the place can converse the reality about what’s taking place of their faculties with rather less worry that they’re going to be dragged into courtroom for frivolous lawsuits.”
WILL Deputy Counsel Luke Berg praised the ruling in an announcement.
“Scarlett, like all of us, has the fitting to query and criticize her authorities. The defamation lawsuit in opposition to her was meritless and will have been promptly dismissed. We’re happy that the Courtroom agreed, and that Scarlett can put this distraction behind her,” he mentioned.
Fox Information Digital reached out to MacCudden’s lawyer, James McAlister, for remark however didn’t obtain a response.
