Latest Breaking News

BumRushDaShow

(172,288 posts) Sat May 2, 2026, 07:12 PM May 2

Veteran loses First Amendment lawsuit after retirement home bars him from displaying pro-Trump and anti-Biden messages

Source: Law & Crime

May 2nd, 2026, 12:23 pm

A federal court on Friday ruled against a Vietnam War veteran in a First Amendment lawsuit over political expression at a retirement home in Mississippi that is administered by the U.S. government. In the case, Johnny Fuselier alleged that the staff of the Armed Forces Retirement Home—Gulfport violated his rights when enforcing rules that barred him from wearing political apparel in common areas.

Now, in a 33-page memorandum opinion and order, Chief U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman "Sul" Ozerden, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled in the government's favor by finding the restrictions on political speech "reasonable in light of the nature and purpose of the forum."

The plaintiff's gripes with the retirement community date back to a series of weekly bulletins in June and July 2023 that reminded residents of a ban on political clothing and signs.

Citing legal guidance and the resident guide, the Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) – which is a "unique federal entity" operating "under the control and administration of the Secretary of Defense" – prohibits residents from displaying "clothing or signs in support or against a CURRENT political candidate."

Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/political-speech-disrupts-veteran-loses-first-amendment-lawsuit-after-retirement-home-bars-him-from-displaying-pro-trump-and-anti-biden-messages-like-lets-go-brandon/

Full headline: 'Political speech disrupts': Veteran loses First Amendment lawsuit after retirement home bars him from displaying pro-Trump and anti-Biden messages like 'Let's go Brandon'

Link to ORDER (PDF) - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mssd.130336/gov.uscourts.mssd.130336.24.0.pdf

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Veteran loses First Amendment lawsuit after retirement home bars him from displaying pro-Trump and anti-Biden messages (Original Post) BumRushDaShow May 2 OP

It took 33 pages to say that's it's private property? underpants May 2 #1

It's not "private property." It says so quite clearly in the first pages of the opinion. onenote May 2 #3

I think lower court decisions are getting longer to bolster rationales against decimation by SCOTUS. pat_k May 2 #4

Post removed Post removed May 2 #2

Good... Sorry Vet.. you're for the Nazi Cha May 2 #5

So if i'm reading this correctly bluevoter4life May 3 #6

underpants

(197,189 posts)

1. It took 33 pages to say that's it's private property?

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sat May 2, 2026, 07:38 PM

May 2

Mississippi 🙄 they have two Senators like my state does.

onenote

(46,228 posts)

3. It's not "private property." It says so quite clearly in the first pages of the opinion.

Reply to underpants (Reply #1)

Sat May 2, 2026, 09:17 PM

May 2

Apparently you didn't read the opinion.

It says, in various and sundry ways, that it is a "Federal Facility" that is "operated by federal employees, including active-duty military personnel."

pat_k

(13,855 posts)

4. I think lower court decisions are getting longer to bolster rationales against decimation by SCOTUS.

Reply to underpants (Reply #1)

Sat May 2, 2026, 09:20 PM

May 2

I haven't read it, but the judge is probably addressing every conceivable angle the black-robed traitors could possibly go after to strike down

Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Post removed

Cha

(320,590 posts)

5. Good... Sorry Vet.. you're for the Nazi

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sat May 2, 2026, 11:17 PM

May 2

PEDO.

PRes Biden didn't lie to you. And, is a

bluevoter4life

(806 posts)

6. So if i'm reading this correctly

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Sun May 3, 2026, 02:43 AM

May 3

Everything else aside, he would have been fine if he just had an anti-Biden (former occupant) sign out front, but because it also included a pro-Trump (current occupant) sign, it was a violation? Seems like a reasonable restriction actually.

Reply to this discussion

Kick in to the DU tip jar?

This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.

As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.