National Park Service faces free speech lawsuit over anti-Trump signs

The American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington, DC, chapter sued the National Park Service on April 23, alleging that the agency violated the First Amendment by threatening to revoke a protest permit over signs critical of President Donald Trump.

The ACLU is representing Accountability NOW USA, a group described in the federal lawsuit as an "unincorporated association that demands accountability for the Trump administration’s efforts to undermine the United States Constitution."

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and Kevin Griess, the superintendent of the National Mall and Memorial Parks, are listed as defendants in the complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Accountability NOW USA maintains an ongoing demonstration against the Trump administration on public property in Washington, DC. In response to an NPR report in February that the Justice Department withheld from the Epstein files certain records related to Trump and sexual misconduct, the group began displaying signs referencing the alleged actions, according to the complaint.

The park service responded by "threatening imminently to revoke Plaintiff’s demonstration permit" based on the signs, the complaint said.

"As a reminder, we are approaching America's 250th and we have visitors of all ages coming to our nation's capital," an Interior Department spokesperson told USA TODAY. "This language is not protected under the First Amendment."

Legal obscenity requires high bar to be met

Dave Mytych, one of the demonstration's lead organizers, described a mixed response to the signs in an interview with USA TODAY. Though he said there was some verbal disapproval, none of the exchanges with passersby over the signs turned violent, he said.

"We understand those words could be interpreted as offensive, but that is not more important ... than our right to display them," he said.

According to the complaint, the group received an email with a statement from Griess on April 14 saying in part that the signs amounted to "unprotected obscenity" that was "therefore prohibited and a violation of law."

In response to an email asking how they had reached that conclusion, the complaint said Griess requested the materials be removed because they had "been evaluated under all appropriate standards and tests" and deemed to fall outside of First Amendment protection.

The First Amendment does not protect obscenity, but it is a narrow legal category that requires a high bar to be met in order for restrictions on speech to be constitutional.

Courts use the "Miller test" to determine whether content meets that definition by evaluating whether it "appeals to the prurient interest," depicts or describes sexual conduct in a "patently offensive way" and lacks educational value.

The ACLU’s complaint rejected notions that Accountability NOW USA’s signs met that standard.

"No colorable argument can be made that they are legally obscene," it said. "Political criticism of the President is not obscene simply because it references alleged sexual misconduct."

Organizer compares alleged DC crackdown to Revolution era

Arthur Spitzer, senior counsel at the ACLU of DC, said in an interview with USA TODAY that the federal government, in his view, "is so obviously manufacturing a legally frivolous ground for trying to take action against these demonstrators."

Spitzer said the signs in question are not Accountability NOW USA’s only signs and that "this is not their only issue."

Both Spitzer and Mytych placed the lawsuit in context of what they described as a broader trend of crackdowns on political speech in Washington, DC.

Trump called for a decades-long peace vigil near the White House to be dismantled in September, for example, after a Real America’s Voice correspondent told the president the anti-nuclear arms protest had shifted into being "anti-America sometimes, anti-Trump many times." Days later, a man was detained after playing the "Imperial March" theme from "Star Wars" behind National Guard troops patrolling the city.

Mytych called the National Park Service’s alleged actions a "clear cut" example of a continuing pattern, comparing recent developments to colonists’ oppressive circumstances that led to the American Revolution.

The National Park Service is "trying to drag us back to a time almost 250 years ago where they ruled by tyranny," he said.

The White House has said Trump is an avid defender of the First Amendment and characterized certain controversial actions as efforts to maintain public safety and order.

After Trump said he "took the freedom of speech away" as it relates to flag burnings in October, for example, the White House said Trump "will always protect the First Amendment, while simultaneously implementing commonsense, tough-on-crime policies to prevent violence and chaos."

Though Accountability NOW USA’s permit had not been revoked, according to the complaint, the group chose not to continue displaying the signs "in order to forestall NPS enforcement action."

The National Park Service’s actions, the complaint said, “(pose) an imminent threat to Plaintiff’s ability to engage in its chosen, lawful expressive activity on federal land in the nation’s capital.” 

It added that the group "intends to display these signs again as soon as it receives legal protection from these consequences."

Among other requests, the complaint asks the court to declare that the signs at issue are not legally obscene, that their display is protected by the First Amendment and bar officials from revoking their demonstration permit based on displaying the signs.

According to court records, Mytych filed a similar federal complaint against the National Park Service in part on First Amendment grounds over being told in late 2025 to relocate a demonstration in Washington, DC, due to a construction project.

A judge dismissed some of Mytych's claims and rejected his request for a preliminary injunction because he was "not likely to succeed on the merits" of his First Amendment challenge in February.

This story has been updated to add new information.

BrieAnna Frank is a First Amendment reporter at USA TODAY. Reach her at [email protected].

USA TODAY's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.