Judge Dismisses Sheriff, Legislator From Suit by KSU Cheerleader Who Knelt During Anthem
Judge Timothy Batten of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia threw out claims by a former Kennesaw State University cheerleader against a powerful former legislator and the county sheriff, finding that the defendants' "only discernible motive was their view that the flag and the anthem should be respected."
February 07, 2019 at 03:06 PM
5 minute read
A federal judge has dismissed a state legislator and a county sheriff as defendants in a suit filed by a former Kennesaw State University cheerleader who contended she was removed from the squad after kneeling during the national anthem at a 2017 has football game.
But Judge Timothy Batten of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia has so far left intact claims by former KSU cheerleader Tommia Dean against former KSU President Sam Olens, who was also the state's former attorney general and is now a Dentons partner in Atlanta, and members of the university athletics department. The KSU defendants have not asked the court to dismiss the claims against them.
Dean claimed her constitutional free speech rights were violated when she and other cheerleaders were barred from the field until after the national anthem was played, effectively silencing the group. Dean was not invited to rejoin the squad the following year. Four other cheerleaders who knelt with her had already graduated.
The ban was implemented after the cheerleaders knelt in solidarity with former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick to protest police brutality. The suit alleged that Earl Ehrhart, then a powerful Republican state legislator who is now CEO of the lobbying arm of Atlanta law firm Taylor English Duma, and Cobb County Sheriff Neil Warren conspired to pressure Olens into taking action to forestall any more public protests.
Dean's counsel, Bruce Brown, had contended in the suit that Ehrhart and Warrant engaged in a conspiracy driven by racial and political animus to deprive Dean of her civil rights in violation of the federal Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871.
But Batten ruled the defendants' conduct in trying to shut down the public protests “was not so invidious as to lump it together with the odium of racism prevalent during the post-Civil War era and thus subject them to liability” under federal civil rights statutes. “[The]defendants' conduct bears little resemblance to conspiratorial persecution on the basis of immutable characteristics by the KKK,” the judge concluded.
In dismissing Dean's racial animus claims, Batten held that the “mere fact” a plaintiff is black “is insufficient to support an inference of racial motivation.” The judge also embraced the defendants' contention that their objections to the kneeling cheerleaders was “non-racial and cuts against Dean's contention that [the] defendants were motivated based on her race.”
Instead, Batten suggested the defendants' complaints and efforts to bar cheerleaders from kneeling during the national anthem were “at least in their view, patriotic.”
“Dean's complaint demonstrates that defendants [Ehrhart and Warren] acted in spite of, rather than because of, Dean's race—or the race-based issues she was protesting,” the judge wrote. “Without a greater causal connection between race and [the] defendants' actions, Dean's contention must be rejected.”
And, the judge added, “A non-black person may participate, protest, and sympathize with Dean's cause—indeed, police brutality affecting a class of Americans troubles Americans across the ethnic spectrum.”
The judge also gave short shrift to Dean's argument that she suffered discrimination by the sheriff and Ehrhart because of her political class. Batten called such a class “indeterminate” and suggesting that, “It could include any number of persons who sympathize with victims of police brutality, or affiliate with the Black Lives Matter movement.”
Ehrhart and Warren “were exercising their own First Amendment rights when they spoke their minds to the KSU administration about their opposition to Dean's protest,” Batten said. “And their only discernible motive was their view that the flag and the anthem should be respected, and that what Dean and the other cheerleaders were doing was, in their mind, disrespectful.”
On Thursday, Warren applauded the ruling. “Everyone as an American citizen does have the right to protest for what they believe in but we also have the right to disagree and stand up for what we believe in,” the sheriff said.
Dean's counsel, Brown, said Batten's ruling “raises a number of potentially appealable issues which we may need to address after trying the case against the KSU defendants.”
Olens could not be reached. But Olens' counsel, Richard Gignilliat of Atlanta's Elarbee Thompson Sapp & Wilson, called Batten's ruling “encouraging,” even though Olens and the other KSU defendants were not accused of any Klan Act violations. He said Olens' legal team is “still assessing” the ruling.
Read the decisionRead more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
'Radical Left Judges'?: Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden's Judicial Picks
4 minute readTrump's Lawyers Speak Out: 'The President Had the Confidence to Retain Me'
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250