A Wisconsin mom and conservative activist has gained a free speech case after being sued for defamation over social media posts criticizing her faculty district's “woke” priorities.
Scarlett Johnson, a frontrunner 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 crucial 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 girls w/ a god advanced. Thanks, White savior.”
In different posts, Johnson described DEI specialists as “woke lunatics” and “bullies” who “bully” mother and father “into silence and compliance.”
MacCudden filed a defamation lawsuit in 2022.
The circuit courtroom allowed components of the case to proceed, however Johnson and her legal professionals on the Wisconsin Institute for Legislation and Liberty (WILL) appealed the choice.
WILL argued that Johnson's feedback have been “run-of-the-mill social media posts” which are 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 may very well 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 advanced” 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 info {that a} jury ought to take into account.
Johnson mentioned she noticed the lawsuit as an effort to silence her and different mother and father who spoke out towards DEI packages.
She recalled going through an identical defamation declare simply days earlier than a 2021 faculty board election, calling it a politically timed try to intimidate her.
“I felt I needed to struggle again on this case. It couldn't be like the opposite. I needed to arise as a result of this might by no means cease,” she advised Fox Information Digital. “They'd hold going after mother and father like me.”
She added that she hopes the ruling encourages different mother and father to talk out towards “radical ideologies” in public faculties with out worry of being sued.
“This units authorized precedent,” she mentioned. “Mother and father in every single place can converse the reality about what's occurring 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 a statement.
“Scarlett, like all of us, has the precise to query and criticize her authorities. The defamation lawsuit towards 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.
