A federal judge has ordered preliminary protections for a Bloomington man who was confronted at his home by an investigator for Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita over a social media post. U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker found on Tuesday, October 20, that Lee Lawmaster is likely to succeed on his claim that investigations director Kurt Spivey used his government authority to coerce him into silence.
The confrontation stemmed from an “86 Todd Rokita” comment Lawmaster posted on Rokita’s official Facebook page. Lawmaster stated his posts expressed opposition to elected officials and solidarity with former FBI Director James Comey, who faced indictment over a social media image depicting “8647.” Lawmaster maintained that “86” in his comments meant removing officials from office.
The home visit by Spivey occurred on May 1. During the encounter, which was captured by Lawmaster’s home security camera and Spivey’s audio recorder, Spivey displayed a badge and warned Lawmaster he could face indictment. According to court documents, Spivey told Lawmaster, "if Comey was indicted, we could easily indict you over this today." Spivey offered to "let this one slide" if Lawmaster agreed to "tone it down a little bit." Lawmaster subsequently stopped posting “86” comments, curtailed his political commentary, and made his personal blog inaccessible to the public.
Judge Barker’s order grants Lawmaster’s request for a preliminary injunction and rejects Spivey’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana. The injunction is specific, prohibiting Spivey from coercing or threatening Lawmaster with legal sanctions intended to suppress or punish his past and future social media posts containing “86” or related political rhetoric.
In court filings, Spivey characterized the encounter as a courteous threat assessment where he affirmed Lawmaster’s speech rights and closed the matter. Spivey also argued that an injunction would hinder the office’s ability to assess threats against elected officials. However, Judge Barker rejected these arguments, stating that Spivey likely used the investigation to silence Lawmaster by "threatening the imposition of legal sanctions unless there was compliance with his demands." Barker emphasized that the interaction being "relatively polite and civil" did not detract from the conclusion that Spivey coerced Lawmaster.
The judge also rejected Spivey’s immunity defense, allowing Lawmaster’s claim for damages against Spivey personally to proceed. This ruling provides preliminary relief to Lawmaster while the lawsuit continues in federal court.
