Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Szilagyi v. Mayor Van Johnson and The City of Savannah
Szilagyi v. Mayor Van Johnson and The City of Savannah
JESSICA SZILAGYI,
Plaintiff,
v. CIVIL ACTION
FILE NO. CV420-165
MAYOR VAN JOHNSON,
in his individual and official capacities,
and THE CITY OF SAVANNAH,
Defendants.
U.S.C. § 1983, and the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States
Constitution for equitable relief and small damages concerning the blocking of
her ability to post, comment, and react (i.e. “like”) on Defendant Mayor Van
her personal page. Plaintiff is one of more than 200 individuals who have been
exercised standardless discretion to censor any speech the Mayor did not like.
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 2 of 16
PARTIES
and writer, who is politically and civically active in the community and online.
“Defendant Johnson”) is sued in his individual capacity for small actual and
nominal damages and in his official capacity for equitable relief. At all times
relevant to the complaint, Defendant Johnson acted under the color of law.
corporate and politic and a political subdivision of the State of Georgia, duly
established under its laws and Constitution. At all relevant times, Savannah
for duties related to communication and the setting of policy, pursuant to the
authority granted him by state law and the charter for the City, and as a matter
2
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 3 of 16
5. This action arises under the authority vested in this Court by virtue
of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1343 (a)(3), the First Amendment
7. This Court has jurisdiction to grant declaratory and injunctive relief
8. Venue in this Court is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because the
events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims arose in this district and division and
because the City of Savannah is located within this district and division.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
she voices her opinion and engages with elected officials, including Defendant
Johnson.
public forum.
14. Plaintiff desires to voice her beliefs and viewpoints and participate
15. Once she is again able to do so, Plaintiff wishes and intends to
immediately resume her public speech activities and engage with a Mayor
Jonson, with the staff who view the page, with Mayor Johnson’s constituents
public forum for Defendant Johnson and Defendant City of Savannah on the
social media platform Facebook. See “Home Page,” attached hereto as Exhibit A.
17. The page was created in May 2011 when Defendant Johnson was an
4
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 5 of 16
18. The page name has since changed to reflect Defendant Johnson’s
Savannah.
that Van Johnson has confirmed his identity as a public figure. See
Defendant Johnson’s elected government position and his work related thereto,
5
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 6 of 16
concern for his constituency and the public, and updating citizens with official
City of Savannah policy and official announcements via video and other means.
See Posts Page, Exhibit E (making official statements and live streaming news
29. Comments and posts can be deleted by the Facebook page host
while the Facebook Page user/commenter has no ability to delete or block the
6
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 7 of 16
30. Deleting a comment from a Facebook page also deletes the comment
from the user’s Activity Log, and blocking a poster prevents them from
and/or hiding their comments from the Facebook Page and by blocking them.
32. Defendants deletes and/or hides comments and bans users because
them from making any further posts on the Facebook Page and banning them
customarily censor the protected speech of citizens on the Facebook Page solely
views.
about the Second Amendment and the City of Savannah’s First Amendment
rights.
39. Defendant Johnson then banned Plaintiff from his Facebook page.
and the Worth County Sheriff’s Office’s Facebook page in an attempt to ask to
42. Defendants did not and has not allowed Plaintiff to resume her
rights.
Facebook page and the number of persons who have been banned from the page.
of April 28, 2020, over 200 persons were banned by Defendants from engaging in
Plaintiff and other citizens from the Facebook Page solely because their
Count I
First Amendment Retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
48. This Count incorporates the factual allegations set forth above.
9
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 10 of 16
51. Such conduct would deter a person of ordinary firmness from the
posting prevents Plaintiff from exercising his First Amendment rights and is a
52. Plaintiff was damaged both by the blocking which prevented First
Count II
Violation of Plaintiff’s First and Fourteenth Amendment Right to Free Speech
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
53. This Count incorporates the factual allegations set forth above.
54. Speech utilizing official Facebook and other social media pages for
other speech.
10
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 11 of 16
violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments and content and viewpoint
citizens.
60. Plaintiff is denied this right to free expression each time she is
Facebook Page.
61. The denial of constitutional rights is irreparable injury per se, and
Facebook Page.
11
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 12 of 16
other injuries as a consequence of being denied her First Amendment rights for a
sustained period of time on issues of critical importance to her and the public at
large.
Count III
Declaratory and Injunctive Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2201, et seq.
64. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Plaintiff
Count II above.
his official page that are critical of her and/or her policies is unconstitutional and
violates Plaintiff’s rights to freedom of speech under the First and Fourteenth
12
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 13 of 16
due to their viewpoint (2) Enjoin the current unconstitutional and standardless
practice of deleting comments and blocking posters; (3) Restore Plaintiff (and
others) posting privileges that were blocked and afford Plaintiff full access
deleting platform activity and banning users from the official Mayor Van
blocked and afford Plaintiff full access afforded any other citizen to the official
i) Award other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
14
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 15 of 16
15
Case 4:20-cv-00165-WTM-CLR Document 1 Filed 07/24/20 Page 16 of 16