CIR Sues Navy Officials, NC National Guard Challenging Government Censorship of Veterans  

The Center for Individual Rights (CIR) has filed two lawsuits challenging government censorship of military veterans’ speech on official Facebook pages.   

CIR has filed one lawsuit on behalf of Sergio Rodriguez, a retired Army veteran and nationally recognized military family advocate, after he was unconstitutionally banned from the official Facebook page of Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay. 

Rodriguez—a recipient of the Armed Forces Insurance “Navy Spouse of the Year” award and a Presidential commendation—was blocked from the government-run Facebook page after asking critical questions about the Navy’s response to a prolonged summertime power outage affecting families on base. The base Commanding Officer Captain Christopher Bohner then directed his subordinate to ban Rodriguez from the page and delete all of his posts, including his inquiries about temporary emergency housing and compensation for spoiled perishables. 

“The Navy’s actions didn’t just block me—they tried to block the truth,” said Rodriguez. “I was giving families relevant guidance I wish I had when I first started navigating the system. Silencing that helps no one.” 

Rodriguez’s work supporting military families spans years and includes advocacy on housing, family readiness, and access to services. His voice is a vital part of the conversation on public pages like Kings Bay’s official Facebook account, which is used to inform and engage with residents on base. 

“This case is about ensuring the government can’t silence voices it doesn’t like, especially those speaking up on behalf of others,” said CIR Senior Litigation Counsel Mike Petrino. “The Navy may not like what Sergio had to say, but the First Amendment prohibits them from shutting him out of a public forum for saying it.” 

Rodriguez’s lawsuit follows a similar pattern CIR challenged in Stanhope v. Hunt earlier this spring. Timothy Stanhope, a retired National Guardsman with 23 years of service, was banned from the North Carolina National Guard’s official Facebook page after posting critical comments about Guard leadership, mismanagement, and living conditions. The Guard deleted Stanhope’s posts and ultimately blocked him, too. 

The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that when the government creates a space for public discussion, it cannot discriminate based on viewpoint. CIR’s lawsuits argue that both the Navy and the North Carolina National Guard crossed a line when they silenced critics in digital public forums. “When a government official deletes comments or bans a user from a public forum simply because they disagree with the speaker, they’ve crossed a constitutional line,” added CIR Associate Counsel Michelle Scott. “Our aim is to make sure that line is respected, online or off.” 

As more government officials and agencies use social media to communicate with the public, the case could serve as a critical reminder to government officials about the constitutional limits of digital censorship. 

“This isn’t about one post or one page,” said Petrino. “This is about defending every American’s right to speak freely about government conduct, even when the government would prefer they stay silent.” 

• Read about Rodriguez v Bohner here 

• Read about Stanhope v Hunt here