Judge Tosses ‘Objectively Outrageous’ Criminal Charge against Arizona Woman Arrested for Criticizing Local Official

Rebekah Massie speaks at during the public-comment section of a city council meeting in Surprise, Ariz., August 20, 2024.

An Arizona judge tossed a criminal trespassing charge that the city of Surprise leveled against local resident Rebekah Massie for criticizing a government attorney’s pay during the public-comment portion of a city council meeting in August.

In a three-page order released Wednesday, North Valley Justice Court judge Gerald Williams ruled in favor of Massie’s attorney, who argued that the case should be dismissed with prejudice to uphold justice for the defendant. This means that the Phoenix prosecutors cannot refile charges or bring the case before a different court at a later date.

“No branch of any federal, state, or local government in this country should ever attempt to control the content of political speech,” Williams wrote. “In this case, the government did so in a manner that was objectively outrageous.”

During Surprise’s city council meeting on August 20, Massie started making objections to how much money a city attorney was making. Surprise mayor Skip Hall interrupted her, citing a form she signed that prohibited any public speakers from orally lodging “charges or complaints” against city employees. The mayor then ordered her arrest.

Refusing to leave, Massie was forcefully escorted out of the hearing by a police officer and cited for trespassing while her ten-year-old daughter was present. The recorded exchange went viral on social media, and Massie’s case has since gained the attention of national media.

In deciding to dismiss the criminal case with prejudice, the Surprise judge said the now-rescinded policy that enabled Massie’s arrest regulated political speech and the content of that speech. He added the government’s suppression of Massie’s speech “would trigger strict scrutiny” in a constitutional-law analysis.

“The Defendant should not have faced criminal prosecution once for expressing her political views,” Williams wrote. “The Court agrees that she should never face criminal prosecution, for expressing her political views on that date at that time, again. Nor should she be forced to encounter additional attorney fees should this matter be re-filed, as she would not likely be entitled to a court-appointed attorney.”

The judge also ordered that prosecutors can request an evidentiary hearing to provide additional evidence beyond the video recording of the city council meeting if they so choose.

It remains to be seen whether the Phoenix City Prosecutor’s Office asks for an evidentiary hearing or appeals the ruling. National Reviewcontacted the prosecutor’s office for comment.

“Rebekah should never have been detained, let alone criminally charged, for speaking her mind,” said Feldman Royle attorney Bret Royle, who represented Massie in the criminal case. “That’s the kind of thing that happens in tyrannical countries but should never happen here. No American should face jail time for exercising their freedom of speech, and we’re relieved the court agreed.”

On September 3, Massie sued Surprise for violating her constitutional rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. She is joined by co-plaintiff Quintus Schulzke, a similarly concerned citizen afraid to vocally criticize Surprise officials as he has done in the past. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is leading the federal lawsuit on behalf of both plaintiffs.

“This is an incredible win for Rebekah and an important message to government bureaucrats around the country that the First Amendment bows to no one,” FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick said. “The fight goes on in Rebekah’s lawsuit against the City of Surprise, Mayor Hall, and Officer Schernicoff. We want to make it crystal clear to governments across the United States that brazenly censoring people and betraying the First Amendment comes with a cost.”

Amid the ongoing litigation, the Surprise City Council voted to abandon its Council Criticism Policy that Massie argued was unconstitutional. The public-comment rule had been a part of the city’s speaker decorum for more than 20 years. The decision was made two weeks after the lawsuit was filed in Arizona’s federal court.

“For more than two months I’ve been living with the threat of punishment and jail time — being taken away from my kids, even — for doing nothing more than criticizing the government,” Massie said after Wednesday’s order. “Free speech still matters in America, and I can’t tell you what a relief it is to have people on my side standing up for our rights with me.”

More on National Review

• ‘Thought Crime’ Is Now a Reality in the U.K.
• Hope for California
• Daniel Penny’s Homicide Trial Begins