Sousa v. Seekonk Sch. Comm.

• Decision Date: 20 January 2023
• Docket Number: Civil Action 1:22-cv-40120-IT
• Parties: LUIS SOUSA, Plaintiff, v. SEEKONK SCHOOL COMMITTEE; RICH DROLET, in his personal and official capacities; and KIMBERLY SLUTER, in her personal and official capacities, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

LUIS SOUSA, Plaintiff, v. SEEKONK SCHOOL COMMITTEE; RICH DROLET, in his personal and official capacities; and KIMBERLY SLUTER, in her personal and official capacities, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 1:22-cv-40120-IT

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

January 20, 2023

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Indira Talwani, United States District Judge

Plaintiff Luis Sousa alleges violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and the Americans with Disabilities Act rights by the Seekonk School Committee (the “School Committee”), Superintendent of Seekonk Public Schools Rich Drolet, and School Committee member Kimberly Sluter. Amend. Compl. [Doc. No. 27]. Pending before the court are Sousa's motions for preliminary injunctive relief. The first motion seeks to enjoin the School Committee and Drolet from enforcing a no trespass order. See Renewed Motion [Doc. No. 28].^[1] The second motion seeks to enjoin the enforcement of portions of a School Committee policy concerning public participation. Motion for a Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 61]; “Public Participation at School Committee Meetings” policy (“Public Participation Policy”) [Doc. No. 27-12].

Defendants oppose Sousa's motions. See Prelim Opp. [Doc. No. 30]; Opp. to Renewed Motion [Doc. No. 41]; Opp. to Motion for a Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 82]. For the following reasons, Sousa's motion to enjoin enforcement of the no trespass order is allowed in part and denied in part and Sousa's motion to enjoin enforcement of portions of the School Committee policy is denied.

I. Background

The School Committee is a school committee organized pursuant to Mass. G.L. c. 41, § 1, and Mass. G.L. c. 71 §§ 1 and 37, in Seekonk, Massachusetts. See Amend. Compl. ¶ 2 [Doc. No. 27]; Amend Answer ¶ 2 [Doc. No. 67]. It is a public body that holds regular and special meetings pursuant to Massachusetts' open meeting law, Mass. G.L c. 30A §§ 18-25. Drolet Aff. ¶ 3 [Doc. No. 16-1].

The School Committee has adopted a “Public Participation at School Committee Meetings” policy (“Public Participation Policy”) [Doc. No. 27-12] pursuant to which members of the public may address the School Committee during public comments periods known as Public Speak. Drolet Aff. ¶ 4 [Doc. No. 16-1]. The Public Participation Policy provides in relevant part

the [School] Committee would like the opportunity to hear the wishes and ideas of members of the Seekonk school community on matters within the scope of [the School Committee's] authority. These matters include the budget for the Seekonk Public Schools, the performance of the Superintendent, and the educational goals and policies of the Seekonk Public Schools.

In order that all who wish to be heard before the [School] Committee have a chance and to ensure the ability of the [School] Committee to conduct the District's business in an orderly manner, the following rules and procedures are adopted consistent with state and federal free speech laws:

1. At the start and end of each regularly scheduled School Committee meeting individuals and/or groups may address the School Committee during public comment periods, which shall be known as Public Speak . . .

2. All speakers are encouraged to present their remarks in a respectful manner.

3. ...All remarks will be addressed through the Chair of the meeting.

5. ....Public Speak shall last no longer than (2) 15 minute periods. Assuming that four (4) or fewer speakers sign up to engage in public comment, each speaker will be allowed three (3) minutes each to present their material. If five (5) or more speakers sign up to engage in public comment, then each speaker will be allowed two (2) minutes each to present their material. No more than six (6) speakers will be accommodated: any individual public speak portion of the agenda unless the Chair determines there is a good reason to extend the time allotted for public speak. ....

7. Speakers may not assign their time to another speaker, and in general, extensions of time will not be permitted unless the Chair determines there is a good reason to afford an extension. However, speakers who require reasonable accommodations on the basis of a speech-related disability or who require language interpretation services may be allotted a total of five (5) minutes to present their material. Speakers must notify the School Committee by telephone or e-mail at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting if they wish to request an extension of time for one of these reasons.

8. The Chair of the meeting may not interrupt speakers who have been recognized to speak except that the Chair reserves the right to terminate speech which is not constitutionally protected because it constitutes true threats, incitement to imminent lawless conduct, comments that were found by a court of law to be defamatory, and/or sexually explicit comments made to appeal to prurient interests. Verbal comments will also be curtailed once they exceed the time limits outlined in paragraphs five and seven of this policy and/or to the extent they exceed the scope of the School Committee's authority.

9. Disclaimer: Public Speak is not a time for debate or response to comments by the School Committee. Comments made at Public Speak do not reflect the views or the positions of the School Committee. Because of constitutional free speech principles, the School Committee does not have the authority to prevent all speech that may be upsetting and/or offensive at Public Speak.

Public Participation Policy [Doc. No. 27-12] (emphasis added).^[2] On January 5, 2022, the School Committee adjourned the open session to a duly noticed and closed executive session pursuant to Mass. G.L. c. 30A, §§ 21(a), (b). Drolet Aff. ¶ 6 [Doc. No. 16-1]. The executive session was held behind closed doors in the Superintendent's office. Sousa Decl. ¶¶ 5-6 [Doc. No. 62-1]. Sousa arrived at the school building and found the doors locked and the School Committee meeting inside. Id.; Amend. Compl. ¶ 9 [Doc. No. 27]; Amended Answer ¶ 9 [Doc. No. 67]. Drolet reports that Sousa stood outside the windows of the office where the School Committee was meeting, began recording the executive session through the window, and yelled, “Why are we not allowed at the meeting? You cancelled two meetings. Why can't we go?” Drolet Aff. ¶ 7 [Doc. No. 16-1]. Sousa reports that he was engaged in protest outside the windows and did not bang on the windows or scream. Sousa Decl. ¶¶ 7, 19 [Doc. No. 62-1]. School Committee Chair Sluter suspended the meeting and called the Seekonk Police Department. Drolet Aff. ¶ 8 [Doc. No. 16-1].

According to the Seekonk Police Department, Sluter reported that Sousa was yelling and banging on the windows. Amend. Compl. Ex. 4 (Police Report) [Doc. No. 27-4]. The Police Report states further that when the police officer arrived, Sousa denied banging on the windows, and stated that he was yelling because he wanted to know why there was no public speak segment. Id. After the officer reviewed the video taken by Sousa and spoke with Sousa and Sluter, Sousa left the parking lot. Id.

On January 10, 2022, Drolet sent Sousa a letter stating that Sousa had “caused a disturbance during the School Committee's executive session” on January 5, 2022. Amend. Compl. Ex. 5 (January 10, 2022 Letter) [Doc. No. 27-5]; Drolet Aff. ¶ 9 [Doc. No. 16-1]. Drolet advised Sousa that School Committee members were afraid for their safety because of Sousa's conduct and that Drolet was considering issuing a permanent No Trespass Order. Amend.

Compl. Ex. 5 (January 10, 2022 Letter) [Doc. No. 27-5]. On January 18, 2022, Sousa and Drolet met to discuss the incident. Drolet Aff. ¶ 10 [Doc. No. 16-1]. Sousa denied yelling, screaming, or banging on the window. Amend. Compl. Ex. 6 (January 18, 2022 Video) [Doc. No. 27-6] at 5:55-12:30. Drolet stated that School Committee members had felt “threatened,” Id. at 18:2018:30, and that the January 10, 2022 letter did not reference the alleged banging or screaming, Id. at 3:00-3:08. Drolet advised Sousa that the temporary no trespass order remained in effect. Drolet Aff. ¶ 10 [Doc. No. 16-1].

On January 24, 2022, despite the temporary no trespass order, Sousa attended the School Committee meeting and played his recording of the January 5, 2022 incident during Public Speak. Amend. Compl. ¶¶ 58-66 [Doc. No. 27]; Amend. Answer ¶ 58 [Doc. No. 67]; Amend. Compl. Ex. 14 (January 24, 2022 Video) [Doc. No. 27-14] at 52:05-55:22. Sousa addressed Sluter and asked about the incident. Id. Drolet stated that “people were scared” at Sousa's behavior on January 5, 2022. Amend. Compl. Ex. 14 (January 24, 2022 Video) [Doc. No. 27-14] at 54:43-54:50. After Sousa continued to speak after his Public Speak time had ended, he was asked to leave the meeting. Id. at 54:43-55:40. Drolet lifted the temporary no trespass order in approximately April or May 2022. Drolet Aff. ¶ 11 [Doc. No. 16-1].

On September 26, 2022, Sousa and his wife Kanessa Lynn attended another School Committee meeting. Id. at ¶ 12; Sousa Decl. ¶ 24 [Doc. No. 62-1]. Both Sousa and Lynn spoke during the first Public Speak segment. See Amend. Compl. Ex. 8 (September 26, 2022 Video) [Doc. No 27-8] at 36:09-39:45. During the second Public Speak segment, after Lynn used her three minutes of allotted time under the Public Participation Policy, the School Committee chair twice indicated that Lynn's time had run. Drolet Aff. ¶ 12 [Doc. No. 16-1]. From the audience, Sousa stated in a loud voice: “I'll wait till my wife's done” and “Then you should have had the meeting two weeks ago ... you're gonna let her talk now!” Id. at ¶¶ 12-13. A School Committee member moved for a recess and Sousa yelled “No!” and continued calling out comments. Id. at ¶ 13. Drolet asked Sousa to “please leave” the meeting, Sousa...