Larry Bushart, a 61-year-old retired police officer from Tennessee, will receive $835,000 from Perry County officials to settle his federal lawsuit alleging First Amendment violations stemming from his Facebook posts about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Bushart spent 37 days in jail before prosecutors dropped the felony charge against him in October.
The case drew national attention as a rare instance of criminal prosecution for online speech. According to court filings, Bushart was arrested in September after refusing to remove Facebook memes that joked about Kirk's killing, which had prompted an outpouring of grief among conservatives, including in Perry County, where residents held a candlelight vigil.
The meme that prompted his arrest read: 'This seems relevant today...' and featured President Donald Trump along with the words, 'We have to get over it.' The post included context explaining this quote was from Trump following the 2024 school shooting at Iowa's Perry High School. Perry County Sheriff Nick Weems told news outlets that while most of Bushart's posts were lawful free speech, residents feared he was threatening local Perry County High School.
What the Right Is Saying
Sheriff Nick Weems defended his office's actions, stating investigators believed Bushart was aware that posting about a school shooting during heightened community grief would cause fear. 'Investigators believe Bushart was fully aware of the fear his post would cause and intentionally sought to create hysteria within the community,' Weems said in a statement to The Tennessean last year.
Local officials noted that Perry County held a candlelight vigil for Kirk, reflecting significant community investment in the conservative activist's legacy. Some conservatives argue that jokes about someone's assassination, even from opposing political viewpoints, can constitute emotional abuse or threats against grieving communities.
Conservative commentators have pointed out that while the charge was dropped, the case demonstrates the real-world consequences of posting politically charged content online during sensitive moments. Some argue this should prompt broader conversations about responsible social media use rather than simply celebrating the settlement.
What the Left Is Saying
Civil liberties advocates say the case illustrates how law enforcement can overreach when interpreting online speech as criminal threats. Cary Davis, an attorney with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which represented Bushart alongside private counsel, framed the outcome as a vindication of constitutional protections. 'It's in times of turmoil and heightened tensions that our national commitment to free speech is tested the most,' Davis said. 'When government officials fail that test, the Constitution exists to hold them accountable.'
First Amendment defenders argue the case sets an important precedent for how authorities must distinguish between offensive speech and genuine threats. Bushart's attorneys maintained throughout litigation that his posts were political commentary using publicly available materials, not intentional intimidation.
Progressive legal advocates contend that high bail amounts like the $2 million set in this case can be used to punish individuals before trial even when charges are ultimately dropped. Civil rights organizations have long argued such practices disproportionately impact defendants and chill protected speech.
What the Numbers Show
Bushart received $835,000 in settlement payments from Perry County, its sheriff, and the investigator who obtained the arrest warrant. He spent 37 days incarcerated before his release. His initial bail was set at $2 million as the case attracted national media coverage. The lawsuit was filed in federal court in December following his October release.
According to FIRE's tracking of First Amendment cases involving social media posts, criminal prosecutions resulting in significant jail time remain relatively rare compared to civil litigation or dropped charges. Legal experts note that successful settlements against counties for First Amendment violations can create financial pressure on municipalities to train law enforcement more thoroughly on speech protections.
The settlement amount represents one of the larger recoveries in recent years for cases involving social media-related arrests, though comparable cases have resulted in jury verdicts ranging from tens of thousands to several million dollars depending on severity of harm and evidence of bad faith by officials.
The Bottom Line
Perry County's decision to settle rather than proceed to trial suggests officials recognized the legal risk of continuing litigation over speech that ultimately resulted in a dismissed charge. Bushart said he is 'looking forward to moving on and spending time with my family' following the resolution.
The case will likely be cited by First Amendment advocates as precedent for holding law enforcement accountable when arrests appear driven by political content rather than genuine threats. FIRE indicated it hopes the settlement sends a message to departments nationwide: respect constitutional speech protections or face financial consequences.
What remains unclear is whether Perry County will implement any policy changes regarding how investigators assess potential criminal threats from social media posts. Communities on both sides of the political spectrum continue grappling with where protected expression ends and actionable threats begin in an era of politically charged online discourse.