A federal court overturns the Elmbrook School District's ban for a Brookfield woman who called wearing masks 'pagan rituals'

A federal court has ruled in favor of a Brookfield woman who filed a lawsuit against the Elmbrook School District after she criticized masks, social distancing and Elmbrook School Board member Mushir Hassan at a board meeting Aug. 11.

The U.S. Eastern District Court of Wisconsin ruled Sept. 25 that the school district could not ban Heidi Anderson from district property. The district had levied the ban, unless she first obtained permission from Elmbrook Superintendent Mark Hansen or the principal of her children's school for a purpose that ordinarily would not require advance permission.

The court ruled that Anderson should be allowed on district property under the same terms and conditions that apply to all other members of the public who have children enrolled in the district. 

Elmbrook School District chief strategy officer Chris Thompson declined to comment about the case.

Anderson's attorney, Brady Henderson of Cream City Law, said in an email to West Now that the court's decision is not just important for his client and the rights of parents and families in the Elmbrook School District, but for everyone who values freedom of speech or limiting the abuse of government power.

"This was not a difficult decision for the Court. The judge simply reaffirmed that the United States Constitution still applies in Brookfield, Wisconsin, and that a school superintendent cannot place himself above the law just to deflect criticism or silence the critics," said Henderson.

Anderson claimed in her lawsuit that the district's ban kept her from picking up her children from school, attending events like her daughter's dance recitals and barred her from voting since one of the district's elementary schools is her polling place.

The district's ban came after an Aug. 11 school board meeting at which Anderson said her children, whom she identified as Christian, should be exempt from the "pagan ritual" of wearing face coverings. Anderson also falsely claimed social distancing and mask wearing are not proven to be effective, and that both precautions represent "pagan rituals of satanic worshipers." 

After being told by school board president Scott Wheeler that defamatory comments should be avoided, Anderson directly addressed board member Hassan, who is Muslim.

“This is not defamatory,” Anderson said. “I’m stating facts. You’re a leader of the Islamic community, are you not? My kids are Christians. They are not subject to face coverings. Christian children should not be forced to wear face coverings any more than children who are Islamic or Muslim should be forced to — as you’ve put it — be subject to the American style of sexualization of children that have to wear less clothing than you’re comfortable with your children wearing.” 

Judge weighs in

In his decision, U.S. Eastern District Court of Wisconsin Judge Lynn Adelman said the case did not require him to determine whether Anderson's comments toward Hassan displayed religious intolerance or were inappropriate, hateful or offensive, saying that the First Amendment would protect Anderson's right to make them.

Adelman said the government may place reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on speech and regulate its own meetings. The Elmbrook School Board could have enforced its two-minute time limit for citizen comments and cut Anderson off once she exceeded the limit, he said.

Adelman also said the board could have told Anderson to keep her remarks focused on the issues or taken other action to prevent her from continuing to speak on topics that were not relevant to the meeting.

The district's policy was not reasonably tailored to prevent Anderson from exceeding time limits, veering off topic or being belligerent at future board meetings, Adelman said. Instead, he said the district flatly banned her from entering school property for any purpose without permission.

"This ban has no rational connection to enforcing restrictions on citizen comments at board meetings and thus can only be viewed as a way of punishing the plaintiff for the comments she made during the prior board meeting," Adelman wrote.

The district claimed its policy was designed to ensure religious harassment is not tolerated on school property, citing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — which says that an employer may not engage in discrimination on the basis of religion or foster a hostile work environment. But Adelman said that because Anderson was offering her personal views as a concerned citizen, employment laws the district cited do not apply.

Adelman said if the district wanted to make it clear it did not condone Anderson's comments it just had to make a public statement denouncing them, which it did with an Aug. 12 posting on its website.

Adelman also said it is not rational to think that because Anderson made religiously intolerant statements during her citizen comments at a public board meeting that she will roam the halls of the district and harass those she encounters on the basis of their religion. He also said the district could intervene at that time, in the "unlikely event" Anderson did engage in such behavior.

Contact Alec Johnson at (262) 875-9469 or alec.johnson@jrn.com. Follow him on Twitter at @AlecJohnson12.