"Secret Lesbian Sex Threesomes" Libel Lawsuit Against Kentucky 2022 Teacher of the Year

Here's the exchange, from defendant's declaration in Hart v. Carver (D. Md.):

And here's the defendant's account of the facts (which is considerably more detail than the account in the plaintiffs' Complaint):

I was a classroom teacher in Kentucky from 2013 through 2022, and was the 2022 Kentucky Teacher of the Year. I am openly gay and left teaching due to the discrimination that I faced in the school system, including ultimately being publicly accused of "grooming" children simply because I advised a student-run LGBTQ+ group, "Open Light."

I now work at the University of Kentucky, where I am finishing a Masters in Fine Arts at the University of Kentucky. I am also an author and have published poetry. My recent book, Gay Poems for Red States, a memoir in narrative poetry, was published by the University Press of Kentucky. Among other awards, it has been named Stonewall Award Winner, a 2024 Rainbow Award Book, and a Book Riot Best Book of 2023….

When I saw [a] message from "Kit Hart, American Girl," I looked at her X profile and saw that she was a chapter chair of the Moms for Liberty group. Based on news reports, I am familiar with that group and its recent controversies.

After I was served a copy of the Complaint in this case in Kentucky, I "locked" my Tweet that is the subject of the claims in this case, so that it is no longer visible to the public. As of today, a total of 134 people in the entire world had viewed the Tweet, according to analytics on the X platform. Only 14 of those people "engaged" with it, which means they were interested enough to see the entire chain and replies.

Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of selected Tweets by "Kit Hart, American Girl," that I identified that labeled LGBTQ+ individuals and supporters as "groomers" or similar terms.

The Harts sued for libel and invasion of privacy, and Tuesday's decision by Judge Julie Rubin (D. Md.) in Hart v. Carver … held that the court in Maryland had no jurisdiction over defendant. (Remember, the lawyer's true superpower is the power to make every case a case about procedure.) The case has now been transferred to the Eastern District of Kentucky, where presumably some day it might reach a merits determination.

UPDATE: Commenter JoeFromtheBronx notes that the "lesbian threesome" may be a reference to a real controversy involving a Moms for Liberty cofounder (though not Hart herself). From Newsweek (Thomas Kika) in Dec. 2023:

Moms for Liberty co-founder Bridget Ziegler's admission to having a sexual relationship with the woman accusing her husband of rape has sparked backlash online Saturday, with many labeling the Florida political leader a hypocrite.

Bridget Ziegler's husband, Christian Ziegler, is the head of the Florida Republican Party and is currently embroiled in a sexual assault investigation. On Friday, it was reported that an unnamed woman claiming to be a friend of the Zieglers filed a report with the Sarasota Police in early October claiming that Christian Ziegler had come to her apartment and raped her, after a planned threesome between the victim and the couple fell through after Bridget Ziegler became busy at the last minute….

As revealed in recently released court documents, Bridget Ziegler was interviewed by investigators in early November, confirming that she, her husband, and the victim had been friends and had engaged in a consensual sexual encounter roughly a year prior to the assault that the victim now alleges….

Comments

[SRG2]

The merits: none.

[TextFirst]

Carver is your classic sanctimonious blowhard-- the only two political orientations are "my politics" and "fascism", saying it's a contradiction in terms for a party of "limited government" to pass legislation about what books are stocked in government schools, immediately going to ad hominem, etc. But on the merits this is crazy, of course any rational reader would understand him to be accusing the plaintiff of being repressed/hypocritical, not that he literally has knowledge of secret lesbian threesomes she participated in. He's a boor, but the law allows you to be a boor on the internet, a right I sometimes exercise myself. He should win on the merits.

[Ridgeway]

Tobias -- you blowhard!

[John F. Carr]

I'm thinking of the guy who got hurt in a BLM march and spent years litigating in multiple appellate courts before he finally lost on summary judgment for lack of evidence that the defendant was responsible for his injuries. One must first litigate whether he could have proved his case in an alternate universe before declaring that he can't prove his case in this one. The lesbian threesome comment is not to be taken seriously. But we must properly follow proper protocols. First, the objection to venue. Only later can you ask that the case be laughed out of a court closer to home.

("Properly follow proper protocols" comes from Onion News Network's report Prague's Kafka International Named Most Alienating Airport.)

[AmosArch]

So if its 'fascism' and 'nazi book burning' to simply remove books from specific limited venues and not just actually ban them is the left engaging in 'fascism' and 'nazi book burning' on a much grander scale with how much they remove and censor everyday? By their logic it doesn't matter that we could get these banned conservative videos and texts on other websites or start our own to host them (which is their usual procensorship defense).

[Randal]

What?

[MonitorsMost]

That looks like shitposting to me that no one familiar with the speaker or medium would take as a statement of fact. You could persuade me to change my opinion if there was evidence that reasonable viewers based on the course of interactions between the speakers or personal familiarity would see the post differently.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

The tweet appears to be about a controversy that has received some exposure:

Bridget Ziegler, co-founder of far-right Moms for Liberty and a Sarasota School Board member, and her husband reportedly have some “alternative” sexual practices, including interests in threesomes. A woman accused her husband of wrongdoing.

When questioned, Bridget Ziegler admitted to the threesome sexual relationship involving her husband and another woman. Reports are that Bridget is bisexual.

As the defendant here notes: “I am familiar with that group and its recent controversies.” “That group seems” to reference that Ziegler matter. Kit Hart herself was not the “lesbian” in question.

Any use of “you” in the tweet was collective (the group).

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Your "far-right" wants to have a word with you about "Progressive" self-proclaimed socialists.

[tkamenick]

Even without knowing the specifics of that particular instance, I would read the tweet as a general allegation against the larger group of people, not the one person who was being responded to.

[Bill Poser]

That looks like hyperbolic, figurative speech, not a factual assertion. On that basis, I'd say there's no defamation case to answer. But I am curious about the defendant's assertions about his lack of contact with Maryland and the number of people who have seen his tweet. The former appear to be intended as evidence against federal jurisdiction, but unless I am mistaken, those facts are irrelevant. Diversity exists because the plaintiffs live in a different state from the defendant and the tweet was available to them and others outside of Kentucky. The latter appears to be an argument that the statement was not "published", but as I understand it for purposes of defamation the number of people reached doesn't matter. What is the defendant trying to do here?

[Kords]

There are two general types of jurisdiction: subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. What you are talking about, specifically diversity jurisdiction, is a form of subject-matter jurisdiction.

His arguments concerning lack of contacts in Maryland are directed at personal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has held that a person is subject to personal jurisdiction in a state only if they have sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state. Basically, he is arguing, "I'm not from Maryland and I have nothing to do with Maryland, so a court in Maryland cannot exercise jurisdiction over me." And apparently the district court agreed with him.

[Bill Poser]

Okay, thanks, I get the part about Maryland and personal jurisdiction. But, what about the small number of people who have seen the tweet. Is that relevant to personal jurisdiction, or is it as I thought a misguided attempt at arguing that the allegedly defamatory statement was not "published"?

[Kords]

I haven't read the full filing, so I can't say for sure. But I would imagine argument about the small number of people who viewed the tweet would be emphasizing the lack of contact with Maryland. For example, if the tweet had gone viral and been seen and retweeted millions of times in Maryland, then the plaintiff could possibly use that to say, "The fact that you published this thing that was seen by millions in Maryland should count as a pretty significant contact with Maryland." But if only a few dozen people have seen the tweet, it emphasizes that any contact with Maryland is minimal or nonexistent.

[dwb68]

Streisand Called and once her s*** posting back

[TwelveInchPianist]

"with many labeling the Florida political leader a hypocrite."

Nothing hypocritical, as long as they weren't having the lesbian sex threesomes in front of class.

[Kazinski]

If Lesbian Sex Threesomes are what it takes for lawblogs to get readers these days, I am definitely here for it.

[tkamenick]

Once again... removing a book from your own library is not "banning" a book. Sigh.

[Sarcastr0]

Neither is burning a book.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

"A total of 673 books, from classics to best-sellers, have been removed from Orange County classrooms this year for fear they violate new state rules that ban making “sexual conduct” available to public school students."

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2023/12/20/ocps-books/

If the government removes a book from "their own" library because a law bans it, it sounds like a ban to me.

[NoVaNick]

An occasional threesome doesn’t make one a lesbian any more than having an occasional cigarette or drink makes one a smoker or alcoholic. There’s a big difference between what consenting adults do amongst themselves and teaching about LGBTQ issues at a public school.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

It was not just threesomes but additional evidence arising that the wife was a lesbian or at least bisexual.

[Ridgeway]

Once....twice....three times, a lady!