Ex-Nashville Firefighter Wins $1.8M Free Speech Lawsuit

Ex-Nashville Firefighter Wins $1.8M Free Speech Lawsuit

Introduction

A federal jury has awarded nearly $1.8 million to a former Nashville firefighter who sued the city over his demotion for social media posts. The firefighter, who previously served as a captain with the Nashville Fire Department, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Metro Government and Davidson County after being demoted in 2020 for online comments that city officials deemed inappropriate.

Controversial Social Media Posts Lead to Demotion

The firefighter’s posts were critical of Black Lives Matter (BLM) and the COVID-19 mask mandate. Following protests in Minneapolis after the death of a man, he wrote on Facebook:
"These protesters are the stupidest people on the planet, other than the arsonist and looters that hang out with them."

Reports indicate he also referred to protesters as “thugs” and “animals”. In response, the city placed him on leave and later demoted him to the lowest-ranking position in the fire department. Public officials, including a Tennessee state representative and a city council member, openly criticized him for his remarks.

Free Speech Lawsuit and Initial Settlement Offer

In his lawsuit, the firefighter claimed the city violated his First Amendment right to free speech. Initially, the city reached a settlement agreement with him for $105,000. However, in March 2024, the Metro Council unanimously rejected the settlement in a 31-0 vote.

The city's legal director warned council members that proceeding to trial posed a significant financial risk. He urged them to consider whether they wanted to fight the case or accept a reasonable settlement.

Federal Jury Awards $1.8 Million

The city’s concerns proved valid when, on February 7, 2024, a federal jury ruled in favor of the firefighter, awarding him more than $1.7 million in damages. His attorney described the verdict as a major victory for public employees' free speech rights:

"This is an important vindication of a public employee’s freedom to exercise their right of free speech. We should never tolerate government retaliation against an employee for speaking out on matters of public concern."

City Responds to Verdict

Following the ruling, a city advisor stated that while officials respected the jury’s decision, they disagreed with the verdict. He defended the city’s actions, citing case law that allows the government to balance its interests against an employee’s right to free speech.

Additionally, the city expressed concern over the size of the award and is currently evaluating possible next steps.