In March 2020, Waylon Bailey was arrested for posting a joke about the coronavirus on Facebook and charged with felony terrorism, but now the court has ruled he was expressing free speech.
Bailey’s case was ruled on in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit last week, with three judges ruling that the joke he made was protected speech under the First Amendment and that he shouldn’t have been arrested.
The joke in question saw Bailey say that the Rapides Parish Sheriff’s Office had been ordered to shoot people infected with the virus.
“SHARE SHARE SHARE ! ! ! !” Bailey wrote in the post. “JUST IN: RAPIDES PARISH SHERIFFS OFFICE HAVE ISSUED THE ORDER, IF DEPUTIES COME INTO CONTACT WITH ‘THE INFECTED’ SHOOT ON SIGHT….Lord have mercy on us all. #Covid9teen #weneedyoubradpitt.”
In their ruling, the judges wrote that there “were no facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that Bailey’s post caused sustained fear.”
“No members of the public expressed any type of concern. Even if the post were taken seriously, it is too general and contingent to be a specific threat,” the ruling continued.
The 30-year-old shared with The Washington Post that the ruling was a “huge weight off my shoulders.”
“It was a really good feeling knowing that the superior judges thought it was silly, too,” he told the outlet. “It just [reassured me about] all of the thoughts and stuff I had these past three years about if I’m overreacting, if it’s even worth it.”
Bailey told the Post he was trying to make light of the impending situation, comparing what was happening in the world to the 2013 apocalypse movie “World War Z.”
He said a few hours after he made the post, a dozen SWAT team members from the sheriff’s office arrived at his home with weapons and bulletproof vests, arresting Bailey without a warrant, the Post reported.
The sheriff’s office later said that the post from Bailey was a terroristic threat, which only started his legal troubles.
Bailey attempted to file a lawsuit against members of the sheriff’s office, alleging they violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights, but the case was dismissed. He has since appealed that decision, and last Friday’s ruling allowed him to move forward with the lawsuit.