At this point, I have spent $61,762 in legal fees seeking accountability, not because I wanted a fight, but because I refused to surrender my constitutional rights.

The lawsuit, Gately v. Suelzer et al. (Case No. 1:26-cv-01480-ABD), filed by David Sergi of Sergi & Associates in San Marcos, Texas, challenges my termination after I refused to censor political statements I wrote in my personal capacity as a Republican Precinct Chair.

The federal court has ruled that I adequately pleaded all four elements of a First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court recognized that my statements about a local election were core political speech on a matter of public concern. It further found that my interest in speaking outweighed the department’s claimed interest in workplace “harmony,” particularly because my release relied entirely on publicly available information.

The Court also preserved my request for reinstatement. A continued refusal to re-employ someone after a retaliatory termination can be an ongoing constitutional violation, and that part of this fight moves forward.

I have also instructed my attorney to pursue a state lawsuit concerning violations of my rights under the Texas Constitution. I am doing this because federal and state constitutional protections both matter, and because sovereign-immunity limits can restrict the remedies available in federal court. Reinstatement is important, but it is not the whole issue. State law provides another avenue for the courts to examine the conduct, determine responsibility, and address the harm caused.

The Texas Constitution protects free speech, too. Article I, Section 8 provides that every person is free to speak, write, and publish opinions on any subject. My political statements were made in my personal capacity as a Republican Precinct Chair, concerning a public election, not as part of my government job.

Texas law says the same thing in plain terms. Texas Government Code § 556.003 provides that state employees have the rights of freedom of association and political participation guaranteed by the Texas and United States Constitutions.

My speech was made personally, as a Republican Precinct Chair, about a public election. I was not using government time, government equipment, government resources, or government authority to make my views known. The Texas Government Code recognizes that being a state employee does not require a person to surrender the constitutional rights every other citizen has.

The federal judge’s ruling matters because the Court has already found that I adequately pleaded a First Amendment retaliation claim and recognized that my statements were core political speech on a matter of public concern. The Court also found, at this stage of the case, that my interest in speaking outweighed the department’s claimed interest in suppressing that speech.

That federal ruling does not decide the Texas constitutional claims for the state court, but it is important. It confirms that this was not minor workplace gossip or misconduct. It was protected political speech. I am pursuing the state case because Texas’ Constitution deserves to be enforced as well, and because accountability should not disappear simply because one court’s available remedies are limited.

But this fight is not just about getting my job back. Reinstatement is only one part of it. This is about accountability for those who took an oath and failed to honor it.

Money comes and goes. Your word either means what you say it means, or it does not. Integrity should not be a moving target, especially for people entrusted with public authority. When it becomes one, taxpayers are the ones who ultimately pay the price.

It is also hard dealing with the same agency that fired you while it appears to be looking for, or trying to manufacture, new claims to pressure you into removing yourself from the department altogether.

That is how people get worn down. If you do not have the money to fight, you may never find justice. And when no one can afford to hold an agency accountable, the people responsible can continue violating the rights of other members.

That is why it matters that we vote for honest, truthful political leaders, people who understand that public service is not a shield from accountability.

Our government has three equal branches, and there is more than one way to hold bad actors accountable.