Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) announced Wednesday that she has introduced legislation to allow Americans to sue federal employees personally for violations of their First Amendment rights.

“I have introduced the First Amendment Accountability Act,” Hageman said during an appearance on Just the News, No Noise.

The measure, formally introduced as H.R. 162, would allow federal employees who infringe on citizens’ rights to freedom of religion, press, assembly, or speech to be held personally liable.

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

It provides remedies including damages, injunctions, and attorneys’ fees.

The text of the bill reads: “A Federal employee who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of the United States, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or any person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the First Amendment, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.”

Under existing law, Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act already allows citizens to bring civil suits when their constitutional rights are violated.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

For example, in the 1969 Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines, the Court ruled that students had the right to wear black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War, stating that “students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech at the schoolhouse gate.”

However, the doctrine of “qualified immunity,” recognized by the Supreme Court in 1967, shields state and local officials — including law enforcement officers — from individual liability in many circumstances.

While government agencies themselves may be held accountable, individual employees often avoid personal consequences.

First Amendment litigator Lincoln Bandlow, who has represented media organizations and individuals in courts nationwide, explained the significance of Hageman’s proposal.

“There has always been an opportunity for citizens to sue the government when their free speech rights have been infringed,” Bandlow said.

“But there had always been immunity as to individual government employees. This changes that.”

Bandlow added, “This adds a level of First Amendment protection, one would argue, by motivating federal employees not to deprive citizens of their free speech rights, because of the risk of personal liability.”

Hageman’s bill was introduced in January and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary for consideration.

Hageman cited examples in recent years where she believes Americans’ First Amendment rights were violated.

She pointed to restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, when tech companies admitted to removing content at the request of federal officials.

Google recently acknowledged that the Biden-Harris administration “pressed” it to take down certain posts related to COVID-19.

The New York Post reported that users such as FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino, White House counterterrorism chief Sebastian Gorka, and podcast host Steve Bannon were removed from the platform after being flagged under COVID-19 and election integrity policies.

Hageman also referenced accusations against the Federal Emergency Management Agency during Hurricane Milton in Florida in 2024.

Florida officials alleged that FEMA withheld assistance from households displaying support for President Donald Trump.

Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody accused then-FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell of engaging in viewpoint discrimination.

The state sued Criswell and FEMA employee Marn’i Washington before reaching a settlement.

Washington denied wrongdoing and said she had been framed.

“If you remember during the storms last year, FEMA admitted that they were not going to those homes that had Trump signs,” Hageman said. “That’s clearly viewpoint discrimination.”

Under Hageman’s proposal, individuals who believe their First Amendment rights were violated would be able to sue both the government and the specific federal employee involved.

Supporters argue that the bill closes a long-standing gap by eliminating the shield of qualified immunity for federal employees in these cases.

The bill is currently pending before the House Judiciary Committee and could advance later this year if it gains support among Republican leadership.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of RVM News. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.