ACLU of Florida Sues Village of Palmetto Bay for Retaliating Against Councilmember’s Protected Political Speech

TALLAHASSEE, FL –The ACLU of Florida filed a federal lawsuit against the Village of Palmetto Bay for punishing elected Councilmember Steve Cody for posting political satire about Charlie Kirk on his personal Facebook page. The Village removed Cody from a committee and barred him from related roles. This was illegal retaliation for Cody’s First Amendment-protected speech, and the ACLU is asking a federal court to put a stop to it.

On September 10, 2025, the day Kirk was killed, Cody shared a quote on Facebook in which Kirk had said that “it’s worth it” to have some gun deaths “so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights.” Cody added his own commentary: “Charlie Kirk is a fitting sacrifice to our Lords: Smith & Wesson. Hallowed be their names.” The post was pointed, satirical political speech on one of the most debated public issues of the moment. Cody’s commentary was squarely within the tradition of robust political expression the First Amendment protects.

The political backlash was immediate. Florida’s Attorney General called on Cody to resign. Two members of Congress urged Governor DeSantis to suspend him. The Village Council passed a formal censure resolution in September 2025 that, notably, acknowledged Cody’s speech was constitutionally protected. Then, in November, it punished him anyway.

The Village Council removed Cody as the Council’s liaison to the Village’s Education Advisory Committee, rescinded his appointments to other boards and external bodies, stripped his authority to speak or act on the Council’s behalf, and prohibited him from presenting any official Village recognition at any event. That is viewpoint discrimination, and it is precisely what the First Amendment forbids.

Steve Cody, Palmetto Bay Village Councilmember, shared the following statement: “In America, you don’t lose your voice in government because someone disagrees with your speech. The Village was free to criticize me. You can disagree with speech. You can condemn it. But you cannot punish it. That’s the line the Constitution draws, and that’s the line the Village crossed. What it was not free to do was strip away my roles and responsibilities because of a political viewpoint. That’s not leadership. That’s retaliation, and it violates the First Amendment.”

Nicholas Warren, Staff Attorney of the ACLU of Florida, shared the following statement: “The Council acknowledged that Cody’s speech was constitutionally protected but punished him anyway because they disagreed with that speech. Elected officials do not surrender their First Amendment rights when they take office, and the government cannot punish speech simply because they find it offensive. This case is also about the voters who elected Steve Cody and whose representation the Village Council has undermined. The people have the right to elect representatives who will feel free to speak their minds without threat of government sanctions, even when what they have to say is unpopular.”

The lawsuit, Cody v. Village of Palmetto Bay, is filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. This is the third case the ACLU of Florida has filed challenging government censorship in the aftermath of Kirk’s death, following Brown v. Young and Santos v. Howse.

You can read the complaint below.