Retired cop jailed for 37 days over Charlie Kirk meme sues, saying his First Amendment rights were violated

A retired Tennessee police officer has filed a federal lawsuit after spending 37 days in jail for posting a meme on Facebook, alleging that his First Amendment rights were violated in a case that highlights tensions over free speech in the wake of political violence. The case centers on Larry Bushart, a 61-year-old former law enforcement officer who was arrested on September 21, 2025, after posting a meme related to the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The meme, shared in the aftermath of Kirk’s killing on September 10, featured a photo of Donald Trump and quoted his remarks following a 2024 school shooting in Iowa, with the caption ‘This seems relevant today.’ Authorities in Perry County, Tennessee, interpreted the post as a threat to a local high school, leading to Bushart’s arrest for ‘threatening mass violence at a school.’ Bushart was taken into custody late at night, handcuffed, and held on a $2 million bond that he could not afford, resulting in his incarceration for over a month. During this time, he lost his post-retirement job and missed significant personal events, including his wedding anniversary and the birth of a grandchild. The charge against him was eventually dropped in late October after a district attorney moved to dismiss it, but the ordeal had already taken a severe toll on his life and livelihood. On December 17, 2025, Bushart, represented by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), filed a 30-page lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. The lawsuit names Perry County, Sheriff Nick Weems, and Investigator Jason Morrow as defendants, accusing them of violating Bushart’s First Amendment right to free speech and his Fourth Amendment right against unlawful seizure. It argues that the arrest was based on a fabricated pretext and that officials targeted Bushart for his political commentary. According to the lawsuit and bodycam footage, local police were confused about the reason for Bushart’s arrest, with one officer admitting he had ‘no idea’ what the concern was. Sheriff Weems later acknowledged that he knew the meme referenced a past shooting in Iowa and not a local threat, yet he proceeded with the arrest anyway. The complaint states that there is no evidence anyone interpreted the post as a threat, and the Perry County School District has no records of complaints related to it. The lawsuit seeks both monetary and punitive damages for the alleged constitutional violations. Bushart’s legal team emphasizes that the case is about setting a precedent to prevent law enforcement from punishing protected speech. ‘If police can come to your door in the middle of the night and put you behind bars based on nothing more than an entirely false and contrived interpretation of a Facebook post, no one’s First Amendment rights are safe,’ said FIRE senior attorney Adam Steinbaugh. This incident occurs against a backdrop of heightened political tension following Charlie Kirk’s assassination, where conservative circles have sought to curb discourse seen as objectionable. Bushart’s case exemplifies the chilling effect that such actions can have on free expression, particularly online. His experience has made him hesitant to participate in political conversations, fearing further retaliation. Moving forward, the lawsuit will proceed through the federal court system, with Bushart demanding a jury trial. The outcome could have significant implications for how law enforcement agencies across the country handle online speech and the boundaries of the First Amendment. As FIRE attorney David Rubin noted, ‘Law enforcement across the country should be on notice: Respect the First Amendment, or prepare to face the consequences.’ In his statement, Bushart reiterated his respect for the law but asserted his rights: ‘I spent over three decades in law enforcement, and have the utmost respect for the law. But I also know my rights, and I was arrested for nothing more than refusing to be bullied into censorship.’ His fight now aims not only for personal redress but also to protect the free speech rights of all Americans in an increasingly digital public square.