{"id":49836,"date":"2025-11-17T14:18:07","date_gmt":"2025-11-17T14:18:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/49836\/"},"modified":"2025-11-17T14:18:07","modified_gmt":"2025-11-17T14:18:07","slug":"biologists-reinstatement-denied-after-kirk-post-tallahassee-reports","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/49836\/","title":{"rendered":"Biologist\u2019s Reinstatement Denied After Kirk Post \u2013 Tallahassee Reports"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"fb-share-icon\"<\/a>
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Tweet\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n

By Dara Kam, The News Service of Florida<\/p>\n

TALLAHASSEE \u2014 Saying \u201cthe First Amendment is not absolute,\u201d a federal judge rejected an initial attempt to require state officials to reinstate a biologist who was fired because of a social media post after the murder of conservative leader Charlie Kirk.<\/p>\n

U.S. District Judge Mark Walker\u2019s ruling Thursday came in a lawsuit filed by biologist Brittney Brown, who worked for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, alleging that her Sept. 15 firing \u2014 five days after Kirk was shot during an appearance at a Utah university \u2014 violated her First Amendment rights. Brown sought a preliminary injunction to require the commission to reinstate her.<\/p>\n

While Walker\u2019s order sided with state officials in denying a preliminary injunction, he also indicated that a decision about reinstating the fired employee could change if more information is provided to bolster Brown\u2019s arguments.<\/p>\n

Lawyers for commission Executive Director Roger Young and Melissa Tucker, a division director, said the agency fired Brown to \u201cprevent foreseeable disruption, reputational harm and loss of public trust. The agency did not police ideology; it protected credibility central to its mission.\u201d<\/p>\n

The decision about whether to grant the \u201cextraordinary relief\u201d sought in a preliminary injunction rested on whether Brown\u2019s speech rights outweighed the rights of the state agency to operate efficiently, Walker\u2019s ruling said.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs discussed at length on the record at the hearing on plaintiff\u2019s motion, the crux of this case comes down to whether plaintiff has met her burden \u2026 to show that her free speech interest outweighs FWC\u2019s (the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission\u2019s) interest in the effective and efficient fulfillment of its responsibilities,\u201d Walker, who held a hearing Monday, wrote in a 12-page order.<\/p>\n

\u201cWeighing both sides\u2019 competing interests\u201d involves \u201ca nuanced, fact-intensive determination,\u201d the judge said.<\/p>\n

\u201cAnd while plaintiff asserts the record is sufficient to demonstrate that the scale tips in her favor at this juncture, this court is not persuaded given the extraordinary affirmative relief plaintiff now seeks \u2014 namely, reinstatement to her previous position,\u201d the ruling said. \u201cAt this early stage, plaintiff has not yet demonstrated that her interests tip the scales. Only time will tell if this changes on a more developed record.\u201d<\/p>\n

Brown was fired after she reposted on her personal Instagram account a post from an account called \u201c@whalefact.\u201d The post said, \u201cthe whales are deeply saddened to learn of the shooting of charlie kirk, haha just kidding, they care exactly as much as charlie kirk cared about children being shot in their classrooms, which is to say, not at all,\u201d according to the lawsuit.<\/p>\n

Walker pointed to an \u201cunrebutted declaration\u201d by Tucker, who testified that there was a largely negative reaction from the public about Brown\u2019s post. The public outcry \u201cdisrupted agency operations, required diversion of staff resources to manage responses, and raised legitimate concerns about the agency\u2019s credibility and public trust,\u201d according to Tucker.<\/p>\n

Walker\u2019s ruling said that Brown \u201cunderstandably argues that Tucker\u2019s declaration was short on specifics and largely conclusory\u201d but noted that the fired worker\u2019s lawyers did not seek to question Tucker or cross-examine her at Monday\u2019s hearing \u201cto explore flaws\u201d in the state\u2019s position.<\/p>\n

\u201cWithout more, this court cannot conclude on this sparse record that the public\u2019s negative reaction was not disruptive enough to justify the action FWC took,\u201d the judge wrote.<\/p>\n

Gary Edinger, a Gainesville-based First Amendment attorney who represents Brown, said in an email Friday that Walker\u2019s ruling wasn\u2019t unexpected, based on the judge\u2019s questioning during the hearing.<\/p>\n

\u201cPreliminary injunctions are extraordinary and rarely granted in the federal courts. It is a shame we could not prevail coming right out of the starting gate, but the writing is clearly on the wall in this case. We expect to do well at trial,\u201d Edinger said.<\/p>\n

Edinger told Walker that Brown\u2019s lawyers did not seek to depose Tucker or request documents from the state agency in advance of Monday\u2019s hearing because they wanted to move forward with the case as quickly as possible. Brown has been unemployed for a month and she would not be eligible for back pay, even if she is reinstated, Edinger argued.<\/p>\n

Walker this week fast-tracked the case, setting what Edinger called \u201ca remarkably expedited rocket docket\u201d in Brown\u2019s attempt to get her job back.<\/p>\n

Edinger called Thursday\u2019s ruling \u201cabout the best order I\u2019ve ever received following a lost motion.\u201d In a four-pronged analysis to determine whether Brown met legal standards for a preliminary injunction, Walker found that three prongs favored Brown\u2019s position, Edinger said.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs for the final prong \u2014 evidence of disruption at the FWC \u2014 the court determined that this was a factually intensive inquiry which requires additional development through discovery,\u201d Edinger said.<\/p>\n

Edinger told reporters Monday that he has been contacted by other government employees who were fired for posting negative comments about Kirk. He called officials\u2019 response to the Kirk criticism unprecedented and said he was confident that Walker would ultimately rule in Brown\u2019s favor.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s going to be an important statement saying that the government can only go so far, and that we live in a free society and we have to tolerate a diversity of opinion, even amongst our peers, our neighbors and other public employees,\u201d Edinger said.<\/p>\n

\"fb-share-icon\"<\/a>
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Tweet\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>
\n\t\t\t\t