A Washington D.C. resident has sued local authorities after being detained for playing the “Imperial March” from Star Wars while protesting the presence of National Guard troops, claiming the action violated his constitutional rights to free speech and protection from unreasonable seizure.
The incident unfolded last month when Sam O’Hara began following a patrol of National Guard members on public streets in D.C. while blasting the Darth Vader theme song from his phone. O’Hara, who had frequently demonstrated against the troop deployment, intended to symbolically criticize their presence by associating them with the villainous Galactic Empire from the films. His protest was documented on social media platforms like TikTok, where he shared videos of his activities.
According to the lawsuit, one of the guard members, Devon Beck from the Ohio National Guard, confronted O’Hara and threatened to call the police if he continued following them. Beck then contacted the Metropolitan Police Department, leading to officers arriving at the scene. The confrontation occurred during a routine patrol, with O’Hara maintaining that he was exercising his right to peaceful expression.
O’Hara was handcuffed and detained by police, preventing him from continuing his protest. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that this constituted false arrest, false imprisonment, and battery under D.C. law, as well as violations of the First and Fourth Amendments. It argues that his actions were protected speech and that the detention was unjustified.
The legal complaint humorously references Star Wars, stating, “The law might have tolerated government conduct of this sort a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. But in the here and now, the First Amendment bars government officials from shutting down peaceful protests.” This phrasing underscores the argument that O’Hara’s creative protest should be safeguarded under constitutional principles.
The deployment of National Guard troops to Washington D.C. was ordered by the Trump administration in August 2025 as part of efforts to address crime in the city. This move has sparked controversy, with critics arguing it militarizes urban spaces and could intimidate residents. Similar deployments have occurred in other contexts, raising questions about the role of military forces in domestic law enforcement.
O’Hara’s protest aligns with a broader trend of imaginative and humorous demonstrations against government actions. For instance, recent “No Kings” marches featured participants in inflatable animal costumes, and a comedian in Portland was detained for protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement while dressed in a giraffe suit. These events highlight how activists are using satire to draw attention to civil liberties issues.
The lawsuit names four D.C. police officers, Beck, and the District of Columbia as defendants. O’Hara, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, is seeking compensatory damages and a court ruling that his rights were violated. This case could set a precedent for how free speech and protest rights are upheld in unconventional scenarios, potentially influencing future legal interpretations.
As the legal process unfolds, the outcome may shed light on the balance between security measures and individual freedoms. If successful, it could reinforce protections for peaceful expression, even in forms that challenge traditional norms. The defendants have not yet publicly responded to the allegations, leaving room for further developments in this ongoing story.