A federal judge ordered preliminary protections Tuesday for a Bloomington man who was confronted at his home by an investigator for Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita over an “86 Todd Rokita” Facebook comment.
U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker found Lee Lawmaster likely to succeed on his claim that investigations director Kurt Spivey used his government authority to coerce him into silence by warning he could be indicted.
The Oct. 20 order grants Lawmaster’s request for a preliminary injunction and rejects Spivey’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana.
The injunction is narrow — prohibiting Spivey from coercing or threatening Lawmaster with legal sanctions intended to suppress or punish his past and future social media posts containing “86” or related political rhetoric.
Story continues below.
Spivey’s home visit came May 1 after Lawmaster posted the comment on Rokita’s official Facebook page. Lawmaster said his posts expressed opposition to elected officials and solidarity with former FBI Director James Comey following his indictment over a social media image depicting “8647.”
Lawmaster maintained that “86” meant removing officials from office.
During the encounter — captured by Lawmaster’s home security camera and Spivey’s audio recorder — Spivey displayed a badge and warned the Bloomington man he could face indictment.
Read more: Monroe County man sues over alleged intimidation by AG inspector
“Listen, if Comey was indicted, we could easily indict you over this today,” Spivey said, according to court documents. “Now, hopefully, we don’t have to come back? Cool?”
Spivey offered to “let this one slide” if Lawmaster agreed to “tone it down a little bit.” Lawmaster subsequently stopped posting “86” comments, curtailed his political commentary and made his personal blog inaccessible to the public.
In court filings, Spivey characterized the encounter as a courteous threat assessment during which he affirmed Lawmaster’s speech rights and closed the matter. He also argued an injunction would hinder the office’s ability to assess threats against elected officials.
Barker rejected those arguments, however, saying Spivey likely used the investigation to silence Lawmaster by “threatening the imposition of legal sanctions unless there was compliance with his demands.”
“Thus, that the parties’ interaction was by both accounts relatively polite and civil does not detract from the conclusion that Director Spivey coerced Mr. Lawmaster by stating that if Mr. Lawmaster ceased posting his ‘86’ comments, Director Spivey would ignore the ‘easily indict[able]’ incident altogether,” Barker wrote. “That is coercion by any reasonable measure.”
The judge also rejected Spivey’s immunity defense, allowing Lawmaster’s damages claim against him personally to proceed.
The ruling grants preliminary relief only while the lawsuit continues.
Indiana Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Indiana Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Niki Kelly for questions: info@indianacapitalchronicle.com.
