Courts (Credit: LevittownNow)
According to an update from the ACLU-PA on Wednesday, the plaintiffs said no enforceable settlement agreement exists because the school board never publicly voted to approve any settlement
The ACLU of Pennsylvania is pushing back Wednesday against the Souderton Area School District’s latest legal move in a federal lawsuit alleging the district violated community members’ free-speech rights at school board meetings last year.
The civil case, filed on behalf of the advocacy group Souderton Area for All and several parents and a former student, stems from fallout over online comments made in 2024 by then-school board member Bill Formica. Formica posted lewd remarks about Vice President Kamala Harris, prompting protests, a packed school board meeting, and criticism from residents.
The plaintiffs said district officials retaliated against them after the September 2024 meeting by banning them from school property, restricting their ability to pick up and drop off students, and prohibiting demonstrations on school grounds. They also challenged the district’s requirement that attendees show photo identification to enter board meetings.
District seeks to enforce settlement; ACLU says no deal was ever approved
On June 16, 2025, the district filed a motion asking a federal judge to enforce what it claims is a completed settlement agreement reached during a January conference and later “confirmed” by the plaintiffs in April and May. The filing asks the court to order the plaintiffs to adhere to the agreement and to require them to pay the district’s attorney fees, according to the Defendant's Motion to Enforce the Settlement Agreement filing.
But according to an update from the ACLU-PA on Wednesday, the plaintiffs say no enforceable agreement exists because the school board never publicly voted to approve any settlement — a requirement under Pennsylvania law for governmental bodies. The ACLU argues that without such a vote, the district cannot claim a finalized deal.
Judge orders sealing of filings despite ACLU’s objection
In September, U.S. District Judge Mia Roberts Perez granted the district’s request to file its supporting brief and related materials under seal. The court’s order directs the clerk to keep all filings tied to the motion to enforce settlement sealed until the case concludes or the court orders otherwise, per an order granting leave.
The ACLU opposed the sealing, arguing that the district did not meet the legal standard for secrecy — particularly in a case alleging constitutional violations by a public entity.
Background: bans lifted, but lawsuit continues
The district had originally barred the plaintiffs from school property after an interaction with a board member in the parking lot following the September 2024 meeting. Surveillance video later undermined the district’s claims about the encounter, according to court filings and earlier ACLU statements.
The ban was modified after the lawsuit was filed and formally lifted in March 2025. A judge later dismissed the ACLU’s request for a temporary restraining order as moot, but the broader lawsuit continues. It seeks damages for the bans and court orders preventing the district from restricting demonstrations or requiring ID for board-meeting attendance.
The ACLU has posted additional documents and case background at aclupa.org/Souderton.
