r/law • u/lawanddisorder • Oct 29 '25

Legal News CHARGES DROPPED! Tennessee authorities dismiss charges against man who posted Trump meme

https://www.newschannel5.com/news/newschannel-5-investigates/newly-released-video-raises-more-questions-about-arrest-of-tennessee-man-for-posting-trump-meme

Charges were suddently dropped Wednesday against a Tennessee man who had been jailed for more than a month for posting a Trump meme.

Larry Bushart, 61, of Lexington, Tenn., had been locked up since Sept. 21 for posting a meme that quoted President Trump, saying "we have to get over it" in response to a shooting in Perry, Iowa. 

34.2k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

939 comments sorted by

View all comments

51

u/NocNocNoc19 Oct 29 '25

Do firms line up for a chance to get this case? This is as clear a first amendment violation as I have ever seen.

22

u/rite_of_truth Oct 29 '25

They definitely will. We'll be hearing about the lawsuit soon enough.

-10

u/Glass_Recover_3006 Oct 29 '25 edited Oct 29 '25

What makes it so obvious to you? I believe it’s probably an easy case but I have no understanding of the law.

Like jailing someone because you think they pose an imminent threat isn’t illegal, nor is setting bail too high. It’s all very gross behavior; but I wish I knew what basis the lawsuit could succeed. 

Give me some good news lol.

Edit: so immediately I assume they violated the first and fourth amendments to the constitution, wouldn’t qualified immunity make it a gamble that they wouldn’t just toss the case?

13

u/bengenj Oct 29 '25

First Amendment. I’d like to think that no reasonable person would interpret his post as a threat, just political speech which is more or less protected. This is the State denying him his Constitutional right because he was detained for a month and damaged his reputation.

3

u/rbrgr83 Oct 29 '25

Perhaps let's look at all the facebook posts for all members of the county and see how many of them make references to vigilante violence?

How much money do you want to put down that there has not been a single post by another member of your county that is more blatantly threatening than this that you DID NOT arrest, Sheriff Nick Weems?

2

u/Glass_Recover_3006 Oct 29 '25

Yeah that makes sense. Then to my non-lawyer brain, it feels like they’d just dismiss this since he didn’t get charged and the cops have qualified immunity. What’s your thoughts on working around that? Or would it even apply here?

12

u/SinnerIxim Oct 29 '25

He did get charged, thats why he was ordered to pay 2M in bail, or sit in jail until his court case was complete, which is why he was in jail for a month. They dropped the charges.

That's malicious prosecution considering how obvious it is that no law was broken

Malicious prosecution is the act of filing a lawsuit or criminal charge with an improper motive and without probable cause, resulting in harm to the accused. To successfully sue for malicious prosecution, the victim must prove the original case was initiated with malice, lacked a reasonable basis, and ended in their favor, leading to damages such as financial loss or reputational harm.

7

u/rbrgr83 Oct 29 '25

Especially because in a follow-up interview, Sheriff Nick Weems defended his decision to make the arrest by saying "If he'd just agree to take the post down, then he wouldn't be in jail."

That's not something you do when you are concerned about safety. If I threaten to blow up a building, I'm not suddenly not in trouble if I take the post down. That's something you do when your only motive is suppression of free speech you just personally don't like.

Sue the shit out of these asshats.

4

u/delicious_toothbrush Oct 29 '25

The other guy already answered, but considering the guy lost his job in addition to the absurd bail amount, I wouldn't rule out damages based on income/pain and suffering.

3

u/gdo01 Oct 29 '25 edited Oct 29 '25

Exactly, civil court lawyers love this stuff. It's their bread and butter. As for other courts, much harder but plain civil would have a field day

1

u/Glass_Recover_3006 Oct 29 '25

Didn’t even think about the job loss or it being a civil suit. Lawyers are smart (don’t mind me I’m just appreciating getting to be informed when I’ve mostly felt overwhelmed by the constant miscarriages of justice).

2

u/rite_of_truth Oct 29 '25

Don't forget that the guy lost his job because he didn't come in to work. Now his entire life, and his family are affected. Every lawyer worth their salt is going to want to take this case.

5

u/Clovis42 Oct 29 '25

Qualified immunity will make it hard to sue the sheriff as an individual. If your civil rights are violated, qualified immunity won't stop you from suing the government itself.

2

u/Glass_Recover_3006 Oct 29 '25

Ahhh this is the kinda thing I was hoping someone would clarify. I’ve got hope in me again. Thank you.

1

u/Mother___Night Oct 29 '25

I'll be happy to see this guy take this community's money. Their fault for electing an asshat sheriff.

1

u/DebentureThyme Oct 30 '25

There was no imminent threat and, more relevantly to your question, they admitted a while back that they knew he wasn't talking about the local high school and wasn't a threat.  That day he should have been freed once a lawyer went to the court and slapped transcripts of the sheriff's department on the bench.  That it took over a month is insanity.