Sign in Subscribe

Franklin Officials Won’t Answer: Are They Enforcing Unconstitutional Speech Bans in Public Parks?

Synopsis: Franklin city leaders are hiding behind legal counsel while allowing a taxpayer-funded event to violate the First Amendment. TruthWire exposes the silence, the risk to your rights—and your wallet. It's time for accountability.

By Kelly Jackson
TruthWire News

A troubling pattern is unfolding in the City of Franklin, Tennessee — and it involves your tax dollars, your First Amendment rights, and a local government that appears more interested in hiding behind legal technicalities than upholding the Constitution.

On April 29, I contacted Franklin’s Mayor Ken Moore and members of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen (BOMA) with a series of pointed questions about their decision to issue a public park permit to Franklin Pride TN, a private organization hosting a June event in a city-owned space. The issue? The organization’s public-facing policy for the event reads:

"Attire/items with slogans, graphics, etc. must not conflict with the mission of Franklin Pride TN. Attendees may not bring in materials of any kind for distribution or sale or display; this includes but is not limited to items such as flyers, cards, concessions, wearable items, etc."

This language — brazen in its intention — aims to ban any expression that doesn’t align with the host’s views, even in a traditional public forum like a park. Whether your message is Christian, conservative, pro-life, or critical of gender ideology, if it conflicts with Franklin Pride’s “mission,” you're out. The question now isn’t just about Franklin Pride — it’s about whether the City of Franklin is enabling viewpoint discrimination on taxpayer-funded land.

The City Dodges the Issue — and the Constitution

Rather than respond to the core constitutional concern, City Attorney Shauna Billingsley issued the following reply:

“Many of your questions are currently part of active litigation and therefore will not be answered as the City does not comment on matters of active litigation… Franklin Pride met all permit requirements on its 2025 application and was therefore approved.”

But here’s the problem: my inquiry never asked about the litigation itself. It asked whether the City of Franklin believes it can legally grant a permit to a private group that openly seeks to suppress the First Amendment rights of the public — and whether the City intends to use police power to enforce that suppression.

The response is a classic lawyer’s dodge — and a cowardly one. The city’s leadership has chosen to hide behind its attorney rather than confront the growing outcry over the abuse of public space and public trust.

In my follow-up, I wrote:

“While I understand the city cannot comment on active litigation, my inquiry is not about whether Franklin Pride met the permit requirements—it’s about the city’s role in allowing a permit holder to enforce unconstitutional viewpoint restrictions in a public park.”

“Granting a permit does not transfer public property rights or allow private groups to suspend First Amendment protections… That question stands apart from the litigation and deserves a direct answer.”

The City has not responded further.

A Pattern — and a Warning

This is not the first time Franklin officials have tried to sidestep responsibility. As I noted in my original inquiry, the City is already the subject of active litigation from citizens who were arrested or removed from a previous Franklin Pride event — reportedly for nothing more than wearing t-shirts bearing messages like “Jesus Saves.”

Yes, arrested. For clothing. In a public park.

Let that sink in.

Now the City has issued another permit to the same group with the same policy that triggered litigation in the first place. They are fully aware of the constitutional questions at stake. They know the case is ongoing. They know taxpayers could be on the hook for massive legal settlements or damages. And yet—they are doing it again.

Is that responsible governance?

Or is it blind allegiance to an agenda that tramples civil liberties while hiding behind city counsel and boilerplate statements?

 

The Legal Reality

The Supreme Court has long held that viewpoint discrimination in public forums is unconstitutional. Just a few key examples:

  • Boos v. Barry (1988): Government cannot restrict political speech in public places simply because it offends.
  • Perry Educ. Ass’n v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n (1983): Viewpoint-based discrimination in public facilities violates the First Amendment.
  • Matal v. Tam (2017): The government cannot suppress expression just because it offends a particular group.
  • Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2010): Public benefits cannot be conditioned on ideological conformity.

Parks are among the most protected spaces under First Amendment precedent. Permits do not privatize them. And city police, if used to enforce a private group’s rules, would constitute state action — making the City liable for constitutional violations.

Franklin’s Leaders Want You to Forget

The arrogance is staggering. This issue is being ignored — willfully — by Mayor Moore and the entire Board of Aldermen. There’s no firestorm. No press conference. No urgent agenda item. Just silence, and an implicit hope that the public won’t notice.

But you should.

Because many of these same elected officials will soon be knocking on your door, asking for your vote. They’ll call themselves conservatives. They’ll tell you they stand for constitutional rights. They’ll wrap themselves in the First Amendment and flag-waving rhetoric.

Just remember: they had the power to stop this. And they chose not to.

They chose to let a private group dictate who may speak — or even wear a t-shirt — in a public park.

They chose to ignore the ongoing lawsuit that could cost Franklin taxpayers millions.

They chose to enforce ideological conformity instead of defending your rights.

They chose to run for cover behind a city attorney who won’t answer a simple question.

 

To ensure your voice is heard regarding the City of Franklin's permit issued to Franklin Pride TN, which raises significant First Amendment concerns, you can contact the city's elected officials directly. Express your concerns about the potential for unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination in public spaces and urge them to revoke the permit or require the removal of any policies that infringe upon free speech rights.​

 Contact Information for Franklin's Board of Mayor and Aldermen:

 

Suggested Message:

Subject: Urgent Concern Regarding Franklin Pride TN Event Permit 

Dear Board of Mayor and Alderman,

I am writing to express my concern over the City of Franklin's decision to issue a permit to Franklin Pride TN for an event in a public park, given the organization's stated policy that seeks to restrict expressions conflicting with its mission. This policy raises serious First Amendment issues, as it could lead to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination in a public space.

I urge you to take immediate action to either revoke the permit or require the removal of any policies that infringe upon free speech rights. Upholding the constitutional rights of all citizens should be a paramount concern for our city's leadership.

Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Contact Information]

 

By contacting your elected officials, you can play a vital role in ensuring that public spaces in Franklin remain open and inclusive for all viewpoints, in line with constitutional protections.​

As the Pride Festival on June 7th approaches, TruthWire News will continue to follow this story and provide updates as they occur. 

If you support what I do, please consider donating a gift in order to sustain free, independent, and TRULY CONSERVATIVE media that is focused on Middle Tennessee and BEYOND!

SUPPORT TRUTHWIRE!

Read next

Comments ()