Franklin Pride Festival’s Unconstitutional Restrictions: A First Amendment Violation in a Public Park

The upcoming Franklin Pride Festival, scheduled for June 7, 2025, at Harlinsdale Farm, raises serious constitutional concerns regarding free speech, government overreach, and the misuse of law enforcement as a private security force. As the festival prepares for its fifth year, with an anticipated 10,000 attendees, its policies regarding attire, messaging, and materials are under scrutiny for directly violating First Amendment protections in a traditional public forum.

 The Problematic Speech Restrictions

According to the event’s rules, attendees will be prohibited from wearing attire or displaying items with slogans or graphics that conflict with the mission of Franklin Pride TN. Additionally, no one may bring in materials of any kind for distribution or sale, including flyers, books, or wearable items. This raises multiple legal and constitutional issues:

1.      First Amendment Violation in a Public Forum

o   Harlinsdale Farm is a public park, meaning it is classified as a traditional public forum, where government-imposed speech restrictions face the highest level of legal scrutiny.

o   Private event organizers using public spaces cannot dictate speech restrictions beyond what the government could legally enforce.

o   Banning attire and materials based on whether they “conflict” with an event’s mission is viewpoint discrimination, which is explicitly prohibited under Supreme Court precedent.

2.      Unconstitutional Prior Restraint

o   Prohibiting attendees from wearing or distributing materials based on anticipated content constitutes prior restraint, a form of preemptive censorship deemed unconstitutional in cases such as Near v. Minnesota (1931) and New York Times v. United States (1971).

3.      Selective Enforcement & Viewpoint Discrimination

o   The rules favor certain viewpoints while suppressing others. If pro-Pride messages are permitted while opposing viewpoints are banned, it constitutes viewpoint discrimination—a clear violation of the First Amendment (Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995).

o   The rule is also vague and overbroad, leaving room for arbitrary enforcement—a key factor in previous rulings where the Supreme Court has struck down speech restrictions (Matal v. Tam, 2017).

Past Precedents: Arrest for Wearing a Jesus Shirt

 Concerns over misuse of authority at Franklin Pride events are not hypothetical. At a previous Pride event in Harlinsdale Farm, a man was arrested simply for wearing a t-shirt referencing Jesus.

• The individual was not engaged in disruptive behavior, nor interfering with the event, yet he was targeted for his religious expression.
• Franklin Police officers, acting at the direction of Pride event organizers, removed and arrested him when he refused to leave at their request.
• This demonstrates how event organizers have previously leveraged city law enforcement as a private security force to enforce unconstitutional speech restrictions.

 This incident highlights a pattern of suppression where the local government and police have failed to uphold constitutional protections in a state that is considered one of the reddest in the country.

The Franklin Board of Mayor and Aldermen: A Failure of Conservative Governance

The permit for Franklin Pride was unanimously approved by the Franklin Board of Mayor and Aldermen (BOMA), despite long-standing concerns from community members who have consistently opposed the use of public space for such an event.

This raises important questions about conservative leadership in Tennessee:

• Franklin is in one of the reddest states in America, yet its local government has repeatedly sided with organizations pushing unconstitutional speech restrictions in public spaces.
• Elected officials who campaign as conservatives fail to uphold conservative values when it comes to issues of free speech, government overreach, and public property use.
• True conservatism demands a commitment to protecting individual liberties, yet local leaders have actively enabled the suppression of free expression.

The Broader Cultural Shift & Progressive Encroachment

 The controversy surrounding Franklin Pride is a symptom of a much larger cultural shift taking place across the country, even in deeply conservative areas like Tennessee. Progressive ideologies have steadily gained ground, not just in liberal strongholds but in places that were once considered untouchable conservative bastions.

• The reluctance of many conservatives to speak out has enabled this encroachment, as the dominant cultural narrative has framed any opposition as hatred, regardless of the rationale.
• This strategy is deliberate—those who object to events like Franklin Pride being held in taxpayer-funded parks are not given room for reasonable discourse but are instead labeled as bigots to shut down opposition before a debate can even begin.
• The fear of social and professional consequences has prevented many from voicing concerns, despite America being founded on the principle of free speech and open debate.

 The Issue of Law Enforcement Acting as Private Security

 The misuse of Franklin Police officers at previous Pride events is a serious overreach of government power.

• Police exist to uphold public safety and enforce the law—not to act as enforcers of ideological compliance at private events held in public spaces.
• The First Amendment does not allow law enforcement to be weaponized to suppress peaceful expression(McCullen v. Coakley, 2014).
• If event organizers wish to impose private rules on messaging and attire, they must do so on private property—not in a taxpayer-funded public park.

 What Happens Next?

 The Franklin Pride Festival is expected to occupy the entire park, including the dog park area, meaning that it will directly impact public access to taxpayer-funded land.

 With an anticipated 10,000 attendees, the question remains:

• Will attendees be forcibly removed again for wearing clothing or carrying literature that contradicts the festival’s ideology?
• Will the Franklin Police Department once again be used as a private enforcement arm for unconstitutional speech restrictions?
• Will elected officials finally be held accountable for their failure to uphold conservative principles when it matters most?

Final Thoughts: A Dangerous Precedent for Public Space

The use of unconstitutional speech restrictions at Franklin Pride should be a wake-up call for conservatives in Tennessee. If local leaders in a deeply red state allow this kind of government-backed suppression, it sets a dangerous precedent for the rest of the country.

 Public parks belong to all citizens—not just those whose views align with event organizers. 

 If this trend of selective enforcement and misuse of government resources continues, Franklin risks becoming a case study in how conservative strongholds can be eroded from within when elected leaders fail to defend fundamental rights.

 If you wish to express your concerns over the unconstitutionality of the policy that is still being utilized by Franklin PRIDE, and would like to express your opinion, the following contact information can be utilized. Based on feedback from years past, don’t expect this board to have as much care for your legitimate 1^stAmendment rights, as they do the artificially applied rights they are supplying to organizers of Franklin Pride. 

 You can email the Board of Mayor and Aldermen in Franklin, Tennessee at the following email addresses:  

• Mayor Ken Moore: ken.moore@franklintn.gov
• Alderman Beverly Burger: bev@aldermanburger.com
• Alderman Matt Brown: matt.brown@franklintn.gov
• Alderman Jason Potts: alderman.potts@franklintn.gov
• Alderman Patrick Baggett: patrick.baggett@franklintn.gov
• Alderman Ann Petersen: annpetersen@comcast.net
• Alderman Clyde Barnhill: clyde.barnhill@franklintn.gov
• Alderman Brandy Blanton: brandy.blanton@franklintn.gov
• Alderman Greg Caesar: greg.caesar@franklintn.gov 

          You can also call the city of Franklin at (615) 791-3217.

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!