Judge grants USD professor’s restraining order connected to Charlie Kirk-related social post

VERMILLION, S.D. (KTIV) - Arguments regarding a temporary restraining order were made in Federal Court on Wednesday, Sept. 24, concerning a University of South Dakota professor who has filed a lawsuit against several officials.

Phillip Michael Hook is a tenured Professor of Art at USD, where he’s taught since 2006. He is suing two high-ranking USD officials and the president of the SD Board of Regents after he was put on administrative leave following a social media post regarding the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

“Of course, the essence of free speech is, the government cannot punish you for exercising your right to free speech. But what happened is the government is punishing him, and that’s why we went to court,” said attorney James Leach, who is representing Hook. “He loved to teach art, loves his students.”

During the Wednesday hearing, Leach began his argument in court by reading a second post made on Sept. 10, an apology for the first post, which was taken down in three hours. The screenshots of the original post, however, were already taken and circulating. Hook was placed on administrative leave with the intent to terminate him. Leach said it’s a violation of the First Amendment.

“And unfortunately, the government here in South Dakota lost track of that in this situation,” said Leach.

Wednesday’s arguments in federal court centered on a temporary restraining order to protect against retaliation, discontinuing Hook’s administrative leave, and pausing a USD meeting about Hook’s potential termination scheduled for Monday.

At around 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Judge Shrier granted Hook that temporary restraining order. It names Tim Rave as the Board of Regents President, USD President Sheila Gestring, and Bruce Kelley, the Dean of the USD College of Fine Arts.

Attorney Justin Bell, who is defending them in court, said that the First Amendment does not cover Professor Hook’s Facebook post, due to the disruption it caused, and bringing Hook back would cause further disruption. Questions about whether the protocol was followed by the Board of Regents were also asked.

The next step in the legal process is a preliminary injunction hearing in about a month.

A copy of Hook’s lawsuit against USD and the Board of Regents officials can be found below.

According to the motion filed by Hook and his attorney, Hook had his First Amendment right of freedom of speech violated. Hook’s motion claims the First Amendment protects him from retaliation.

One of the cases it cites in Hook’s defense is Rankin v. McPherson, where, in 1981, a clerical employee in Texas kept her job after expressing that if a second assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan were to occur, she hoped it would be successful.

The Supreme Court held that her First Amendment right to speak outweighed the company’s interest in firing her.

“Professor Hook has a right to disagree with the defendants. The debate about Mr. Kirk’s beliefs is for the marketplace of ideas. The First Amendment guarantees the marketplace stays open, and the government may not punish people for their ideas,” the motion’s conclusion reads.

Want to get the latest news and weather from Siouxland’s News Source? Follow these links to download our KTIV News app and our First Alert Weather app.