Arden Wells often criticizes Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff Gerald Sticker on Facebook. In July 2025, those posts got him in trouble. The sheriff’s office arrested him twice. Earlier this month (in February), District Attorney Scott Perrilloux of the 21st Judicial District told Fox 8 that his office rejected three counts brought against Arden from these arrests. Although Attorney General Liz Murill’s office said it is still reviewing the cases, existing precedent set by the Institute for Justice (IJ) provides strong protections for Arden’s speech, especially in Louisiana.
Sheriff Sticker said in a release that the arrest was made because “the law does not allow someone to falsely yell ‘fire’ in the middle of a theater to create panic” nor to “falsely publicize a concerning event like an inmate escape to scare people…” The first line of argument refers to the 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case, Schenck v US, which allowed censorship of anti-war pamphlets under the “clear and present danger” test, comparing them to “falsely shouting fire in a theater.” But the Supreme Court has since effectively overruled that test. Now, speech only loses First Amendment protection in extreme circumstances, such as when it’s a true threat or is likely to cause imminent lawlessness.
Fortunately for Arden, Sheriff Sticker’s exact line of argument was rejected in the case Bailey v. Iles , where IJ represented Waylon Bailey in a lawsuit regarding his arrest over a Facebook post he made about COVID-19 back in 2020. Waylon made a joke comparing the bizarre COVID-19 situation to a zombie apocalypse, joking that the local sheriff’s office would soon be shooting “the infected.” To make it crystal clear that it was a joke, the post ended with a hashtag, “#weneedyoubradpitt,” in reference to the movie star’s zombie film World War Z and a series of silly emojis.
Although few people saw Waylon’s post and no one was alarmed by it, the sheriff’s office for Rapides Parish, Louisiana, found Waylon at his garage, arrested him, and took him to jail. Similar to Arden’s situation, the Rapides Parish Sherrif’s Office accused Waylon of violating the state’s anti-terrorism laws. But the district attorney dropped the case.
Waylon sued over the unconstitutional detention but his case was thrown out by a district court that cited the century old Schenck decision despite the Supreme Court effectively overruling it decades ago. Waylon partnered with IJ to appeal his case to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court held that the arrest violated his First Amendment right to free speech, squarely rejecting the “clear and present danger” test from Schenck. And it held that the deputy who spearheaded Waylon’s arrest was not entitled to qualified immunity because “decades of Supreme Court precedent” put the deputy on notice that Waylon’s joke was protected speech. With his case revived, Waylon was later awarded damages at trial for the arrest.
With Sheriff Sticker mentioning this line of argument in his statement on Arden’s arrest, it is no surprise that the local DA doesn’t want to move forward with the criminal charges. Should Arden seek to file a lawsuit, he is going to have the Bailey decision standing firmly in his corner.
This is a potent example of how IJ’s success in fighting against First Amendment retaliation sets lasting precedents protecting freedom of speech. Last week, an Iowa federal court ruled that Noah Petersen’s rights were violated when he was arrested for criticizing his mayor and police department at a city council meeting during the public comment period. In 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Gonzalez v. Trevino that American’s First Amendment rights are violated when they are arrested in retaliation for their speech.
Facts Only
Arden Wells: Facebook critic of Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff Gerald Sticker
Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff's Office: arrested Arden Wells twice in July 2025
District Attorney Scott Perrilloux: dropped three counts brought against Arden in early February 2026
Attorney General Liz Murill’s office: still reviewing the cases
Institute for Justice (IJ): provided strong protections for Arden's speech
Waylon Bailey: Facebook user arrested over a post about COVID-19 in 2020
Rapides Parish Sheriff’s Office: arrested Waylon Bailey
5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals: held that Waylon's arrest violated his First Amendment right to free speech
Noah Petersen: criticized mayor and police department at a city council meeting in Iowa, arrested and had rights violated
Executive Summary
Arden Wells, a frequent critic of Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff Gerald Sticker on Facebook, was arrested twice by the sheriff’s office in July 2025. The District Attorney Scott Perrilloux dropped three counts brought against Arden from these arrests in early February 2026. Although the Attorney General Liz Murill’s office is still reviewing the cases, previous legal precedent set by the Institute for Justice (IJ) provides strong protections for Arden’s speech, especially in Louisiana.
Sheriff Sticker's office justified the arrest, citing that "the law does not allow someone to falsely yell ‘fire’ in the middle of a theater to create panic" or to "falsely publicize a concerning event like an inmate escape to scare people." However, this argument was rejected in the case Bailey v. Iles, where IJ represented Waylon Bailey in a lawsuit regarding his Facebook post about COVID-19 back in 2020. Waylon's joke comparing the pandemic to a zombie apocalypse did not alarm anyone, but he was arrested and jailed by the Rapides Parish Sheriff’s Office for violating anti-terrorism laws. The district attorney dropped the case, and Waylon later sued over the unconstitutional detention. His case was revived when the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the arrest violated his First Amendment right to free speech, squarely rejecting the “clear and present danger” test from Schenck.
The similarities between Arden's and Waylon’s cases could lead to a potential lawsuit by Arden, leveraging the Bailey decision as precedent. The Institute for Justice has been successful in fighting against First Amendment retaliation, setting lasting precedents protecting freedom of speech. Recently, an Iowa federal court ruled that Noah Petersen's rights were violated when he was arrested for criticizing his mayor and police department at a city council meeting during the public comment period.
Full Take
The Sheriff Sticker’s office’s argument for arresting Arden Wells mirrors the "falsely shouting 'fire' in a theater" example from Schenck v. US, a 1919 Supreme Court case that allowed censorship under the “clear and present danger” test. However, the Supreme Court has since overruled this test, with speech only losing First Amendment protection in extreme circumstances such as true threats or likely imminent lawlessness.
The Bailey v. Iles case, where IJ successfully defended Waylon Bailey against similar charges, illustrates the evolution of First Amendment protections for speech, particularly on social media. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Waylon's joke was protected under his First Amendment rights, setting a strong precedent that Arden may leverage in any potential lawsuit against Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff’s Office.
The Institute for Justice has been instrumental in establishing and reinforcing these legal protections for free speech, as demonstrated by their successful defense of Noah Petersen's rights when he was arrested for criticizing his local authorities. This trend highlights the importance of organizations like IJ in safeguarding citizens' First Amendment rights in an increasingly complex digital landscape.
Questions to consider: What other factors might influence the outcome of Arden Wells’ potential lawsuit? How does the shifting legal landscape around free speech on social media impact individual expression and civic engagement?
Sentinel — Human
Although the text shows some signs of human writing, its coherence and passionate argumentation suggest it is likely written by a human journalist.