City Defeats Free Speech Suit Over ‘All Lives Matter’ Mural

The City of Bloomington’s refusal to allow a conservative student group at Indiana University to paint an “All Lives Matter” mural didn’t violate the students’ First Amendment rights, a federal court ruled.

The mural request denial wasn’t viewpoint discrimination because the city’s 2022 prohibition on the use of words and letters in semi-permanent and permanent art is content neutral, the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana said in a Thursday judgment ruling in favor of city defendants.

The Indiana University Chapter of Turning Point USA sought to paint a 15 by 145 foot mural containing the words “All Lives Matter” and “bisected by a thin blue line and a thin red line to symbolize Plaintiffs’ support for first responders and law enforcement” on a city-owned street after a student group was granted permission to paint a “Black Lives Matter” mural on campus. The chapter sued the city, in addition to then-City Attorney Michael Rouker and Director of Public Works Adam Wason, in March 2022 after the city officials effectively denied the mural request via email. But the group’s 2021 request wasn’t formally presented to the city’s Board of Public Works, a body that decides whether to approve street murals and other “requests to encroach the public right of way.”

Their lawsuit included an injunction ruling that required the city to promulgate explicit policies around art installations in the public right of way. The 2022 policy forbid the use of “words, letters, numbers, universally recognized symbols, or logos of any kind"—a stipulation that led to a second denial the chapter faced in 2023 when it applied to host a special event to paint its “All Lives Matter” mural.

The court held a bench trial in November 2025 to resolve the chapter’s motion for reconsideration of its summary judgment bid. While the court denied a majority of the student group’s summary judgment motion, it decided to preserve their viewpoint discrimination claim since there were “genuine issues of material fact remained regarding the motives of Mr. Wason and Mr. Rouker.”

The trial focused on the chapter’s claim under Monell v. Department of Social Services, which alleged the city’s unwritten policies and customs around public art violated the First Amendment because it limited discourse based on content and subject matter. The student group failed to properly plead a Monell claim since it didn’t provide any evidence showing how a city “custom or practice was the ‘moving force’ that caused Plaintiffs’ alleged constitutional injury.”

“Mr. Rouker’s response cannot be attributed to the City for purposes of Monell,” Judge Sarah Evans Barker said. “Even if it could, the Court previously determined that an identical ban on private art containing words or letters in the City’s 2022 Policy did not implicate First Amendment concerns as applied to Plaintiffs.”

Rouker testified that he “had no personal concerns” about the viewpoint behind the “All Lives Matter” mural, the opinion said. Instead, based on his experience as a lawyer, Rouker said he was “concerned about the prospect of a policy allowing private individuals to paint any words on City streets, regardless of the content of the message.”

Wason also testified that he had “no personal disagreement with Plaintiffs’ ‘All Lives Matter’ message.” However, at one point he claims he was “made aware of concerns” within the city that the mural “would cause disruptions and protests in the community if it were permitted,” the opinion said.

Based on these testimonies—and the lack of facts the plaintiffs presented to disprove them—Barker rejected individual viewpoint discrimination claims the chapter filed against Rouker and Wason.

Kroger Gardis & Regas LLP represents the university Turning Point USA chapter. Church, Church, Hittle and Antrim represents the city defendants.

The case is Ind. Univ. Chapter of Turning Point USA v. Bloomington, S.D. Ind., No. 1:22-cv-00458, post-trial judgment filed 3/12/26.