U.S. District Court Judge John Steele on May 28 turned down an attempt to stay his temporary injunction allowing a drag performance onstage at Naples’ Cambier Park during the LGBTQ+-themed Pride Fest on June 7.
So far, the city of Naples and City Council, defendants in that injunction request, have not announced further action. A May 28 statement from the city said only that it is reviewing the decision:
“On May 27, U.S. District Court Judge Steele denied the city’s emergency motion to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal. While this outcome was anticipated, the city’s legal team is reviewing the order and determining next steps with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The city remains confident it has both the legal responsibility and the authority to attach reasonable restrictions on special event permits to ensure public safety. Beyond this, and as a matter of policy, the city does not comment in detail on legal strategy for active litigation.”
Naples Pride, organizer of Pride Fest, had not responded to a request for comment by Wednesday afternoon.
Steele’s initial May 12 ruling on an injunction request filed April 10 by Naples Pride and the American Civil Liberties Union allowed the show on the stage at Cambier Park under the protection of First Amendment free speech. Steele said that protection is applicable in both a public forum or in a “limited public forum,” as the city’s appeal to the original injunction characterized it.
On May 16, City Council voted to appeal. It further requested an emergency stay on the judge’s ruling under the rationale that Naples Pride and the ACLU had filed their injunction request belatedly to prevent maneuvering to stop it. Steele rejected that reasoning:
“The proceedings so far in this case amply demonstrate that federal litigation is not always for the faint of heart. Naples Pride’s explanation for the three-month delay in bringing this constitutional challenge to Pride Fest 2025’s location and age restrictions is persuasive. A period of two to three months seems reasonable for a party to find appropriate counsel, consider [its] options, prepare [its] lawsuit and prepare [its] [preliminary injunction] motion.’”
The District Court denial of an emergency stay also chided the city for what Steele said was its attempt to change the forum of the appeal in its latest request.
It pointed out that the city had sought the original appeal to the injunction on the rationale that the drag show was in a “limited public forum” at the park. The request for an emergency stay of the injunction objected to the drag show as being in the city’s “Special Event Series,” which it said limited the forum to a certain class of speakers.
“The city’s ‘Program’ is not the forum at issue in this case, no matter what defendants now assert,” Steele wrote. Further, his decision found that “the location and age restrictions are content- and viewpoint-based, and thus, unconstitutional, whether the forum is a traditional or limited public forum.”
The original injunction ruling, however, is only temporary, through June 8, the day after Pride Fest this year.
Part of the Naples Pride lawsuit against the city, Council and police department also claimed the city-levied security costs of $44,160 were unreasonable for the group’s size and five-hour annual time slot in the park.
Steele’s ruling did not preclude extraordinary charges for security. But it said the city and Naples Pride needed to determine what was reasonable without constituting what’s known as a “heckler’s veto,” that is, security costs so onerous they make a public forum too expensive to hold.
Naples Pride had said previously that it contacted the city after the decision, offering to work with it. But it received no response, a representative said.
