A recent ruling by District Judge Daman Cantrell has allowed a libel lawsuit against Oklahoma state schools Superintendent Ryan Walters to progress to the discovery phase. The lawsuit was initiated by Rob Miller, the superintendent of Bixby Public Schools, after Walters made derogatory statements about Miller during a July press conference. Walters referred to Miller as “a clown and a liar” and implied that the Bixby district was under investigation for financial improprieties, comments that Miller’s attorneys argue were false and damaging. They point out that just two days before these allegations, Walters had reaffirmed the Bixby district’s good standing and full accreditation, suggesting he was aware of the truth when making his statements.
Walters’ legal team sought to have the lawsuit dismissed based on claims of sovereign immunity and the assertion that Miller, being a public figure, had not proven that Walters acted with “actual malice.” This aspect of the law requires that public figures demonstrate that the defendant knew their statements were false or acted with a reckless disregard for the truth. Judge Cantrell acknowledged that both parties recognized Walters as a public figure under the Oklahoma Citizens Participation Act (OCPA), which aims to protect both free speech and the right to file legitimate lawsuits.
In his ruling, Cantrell highlighted that Miller had presented sufficient evidence from the press conference to support his claims under the OCPA, particularly concerning comments about alleged financial problems within the Bixby district. The lawsuit is part of an ongoing dispute between Walters and Miller, which intensified following Miller’s inquiries about delays in federal funding allocations crucial for schools, particularly related to Title I funding designed to assist low-income students. Miller’s concerns resonated with other district leaders, reflecting broader dissatisfaction with the state’s handling of budgetary issues.
The fallout from Walters’ statements included a public outburst where he labeled Miller a liar and a “true embarrassment,” insisting that Miller was aware of the scheduled timing of Title I fund distributions. Walters asserted that Miller’s concerns were unfounded and fabricated, stating that there had been no financial issues raised by Miller until then. Judge Cantrell’s ruling cited Walters’ allegations regarding financial issues as particularly relevant to Miller’s claim of slander and injury to his professional reputation.
Cantrell’s decision allows Miller to pursue further discovery, including audits and additional documentation regarding the Bixby district’s financial status. In evaluating the initial evidence, the judge found that Miller’s claims were substantial enough to warrant further investigation, suggesting that the court would delve deeper into the facts before deciding on the merits of the case at trial. The judge reiterated that the ruling pertains specifically to the OCPA issues related to the motion to dismiss and does not preclude additional arguments raised by Walters in future proceedings.
Overall, this legal battle encapsulates broader tensions in Oklahoma’s educational landscape, where funding allocation and administrative accountability are under scrutiny. As the case moves forward, it could set critical precedents regarding the responsibilities and limits of public officials in their public statements, especially when involving allegations that can significantly impact reputations and the functioning of educational institutions. The outcome of Miller’s lawsuit against Walters remains to be seen, but it undeniably highlights ongoing conflicts in the state’s educational governance.
