Hoenack v. Litchfield Elementary School District No. 79
June 26, 2026·2:22-cv-01903-JJT·Unpublished·By Aisha Johnson
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court's summary judgment in a civil rights action brought by a school board member. The court held that the school district did not violate the appellant's First Amendment rights by restricting speech that disrupted the orderly conduct of its meetings.
August Jeremy Hoenack, proceeding pro se, appealed from a district court’s summary judgment in his action under Section nineteen hundred and eighty-three of Title forty-two of the United States Code. Hoenack alleged violations of his First Amendment rights and state law claims arising from his membership on the board of the Litchfield Elementary School District No. 79.
The court’s reasoning
The panel reviewed the case de novo and concluded that the district court properly granted summary judgment. The court found that the district did not violate the First Amendment when it restricted speech that was off-topic or that disrupted, disturbed, or otherwise impeded the orderly conduct of the meeting. The court also affirmed the denial of Hoenack’s motion for reconsideration and the grant of attorney’s fees to the district, noting that the district’s request for fees in its answering brief was denied without prejudice because a separate motion is required.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the authority of local school districts to manage meeting conduct and limits the ability of board members to claim First Amendment violations for speech that disrupts official proceedings.
