Civil rights attorney and gun rights activist CJ Grisham has filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, alleging that multiple Tarrant County officials unlawfully detained, assaulted, and censored him in violation of his constitutional rights. The 32-page complaint, filed on July 7, 2025, names County Judge Tim O’Hare, Chief Deputies Craig Driskell and Jennifer Gabbert, Sergeants Orville George and Michael Jauss, and Tarrant County as defendants.

The complaint alleges violations of the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments, as well as state constitutional rights and protections under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA). Grisham, a retired U.S. Army Counterintelligence Special Agent, argues that his LEOSA credentials, issued by the Department of Defense, were improperly rejected by Tarrant County officials—despite his federally protected right to carry a firearm and his active Texas License to Carry (LTC).

Grisham’s ordeal, reported by The Hawk’s Eye earlier this year, centered around two separate public meetings of the Tarrant County Commissioners Court in January 2025. That report documented his initial detention and signaled the legal action that would follow. The lawsuit now adds vivid detail to what Grisham calls a targeted campaign to suppress political speech, disarm critics, and enforce unconstitutional “decorum” rules.

January 14: Detained for Lawfully Carrying at a Public Meeting

Grisham arrived at the Tarrant County Commissioners Court meeting on January 14, 2025, prepared to speak about the in-custody death of his friend and fellow activist, Mason Yancy. He entered the building lawfully armed, citing Texas Penal Code exemptions for LTC holders and retired law enforcement officers. No proper signage prohibiting carry—under Penal Code §§ 30.06 or 30.07—was posted.

The lawsuit states that while returning from the restroom, Grisham encountered Chief Deputy Driskell, who asked, “Are you packing?” Grisham confirmed that he was. Driskell responded, “You’re not going in there with a gun.” Grisham explained that he was lawfully exempt under Tex. Pen. Code § 46.15 and presented his Department of Defense-issued LEOSA ID. Driskell allegedly dismissed the credential as invalid, saying, “You can generate your own little badge and that’s fine.”

Tensions escalated when Grisham responded, “Read the fucking law, Chief,” prompting Driskell to threaten arrest for disorderly conduct. Shortly after, Sergeant Orville George allegedly grabbed Grisham’s arm, to which Grisham raised his hands and told him not to touch him. According to the complaint, George used his body weight to push Grisham backward, and deputies then placed him in handcuffs.

Grisham says his livestream was shut off and he was taken to a hallway with no cameras or body-worn devices. Deputies held him there for over 40 minutes, during which time he again produced his credentials. Despite being presented with a valid LEOSA ID and LTC, Chief Deputy Gabbert reportedly argued that the law had changed and no one could carry into the meeting. After searching for a valid sign and failing to find one that met statutory requirements, Gabbert allegedly returned with notice of a “small sign,” which the lawsuit describes as non-compliant with Texas law.

Sheriff Bill Waybourn entered the scene but did not intervene to stop the detention. Eventually, Waybourn offered Grisham a choice: return his firearm to his vehicle or leave. Grisham instead chose to leave the building entirely and later emailed and mailed a complaint to Judge O’Hare.

January 28: Pain Compliance, Bruises, and Viewpoint Discrimination

Grisham returned to the Commissioners Court two weeks later on January 28, again intending to speak about Yancy’s death and his own prior arrest. This time, new paper signs were posted stating that firearms were banned except for licensed individuals.

As he exited the elevator, Grisham observed several deputies waiting and was again approached by Driskell and George. When he attempted to proceed to the chambers, deputies allegedly blocked him. Grisham refused a warrantless search and asked if they had probable cause. Sergeant Jauss then reportedly grabbed his arm, twisted it behind his back, and used upward force, causing visible bruising. Grisham alleges that the pain was used coercively to compel him to show his LTC. Only then was he allowed to enter.

He later photographed the bruises, which the complaint includes as evidence of excessive force.

Silenced for Saying “Read the Fucking Law”

During public comment that day, Grisham began to recount his January 14 experience. He said:

“The thugs that you have outside the door there assaulted me, threw me in handcuffs for no reason whatsoever, and tried to arrest me. Thankfully, Sheriff Waybourne thought the better of valor and listened to me when I told him to read the fucking law.”

Judge Tim O’Hare immediately cut off his microphone and ordered him removed, saying, “It’s not gonna be protected in this courtroom.”

Grisham protested, “Excuse me. That’s protected speech.” He was escorted out by deputies under threat of arrest. According to the complaint, he was not warned or given a chance to rephrase his comments. The lawsuit argues that his speech did not fall under any of the narrow exceptions to First Amendment protection such as fighting words, obscenity, or incitement.

The complaint contrasts O’Hare’s enforcement of the court’s “rules of decorum” with O’Hare’s own comment during a prior meeting, in which he told another commissioner she was “the most classless person to ever sit in that chair.” O’Hare was not removed or silenced for that remark.

Challenging the Constitutionality of “Rules of Decorum”

Central to Grisham’s lawsuit is the claim that Tarrant County’s “rules of decorum” are both unconstitutional and selectively enforced. The rules prohibit “personal attacks, impertinent, profane, obscene, or slanderous remarks.” Grisham argues that these restrictions constitute content-based censorship in violation of both the First Amendment and Texas Government Code § 551.007(e), which prohibits public bodies from banning criticism of government officials.

The lawsuit alleges that the rules are used as a tool to silence critics while officials themselves remain free to speak without limitation. It also asserts that no other attendees were searched or questioned about being armed—only Grisham.

Legal Claims and Alleged Pattern of Abuse

Grisham brings multiple causes of action under federal and state law, including:

• False imprisonment and excessive force under the Fourth Amendment
• Retaliation and prior restraint under the First Amendment
• Violation of the Second Amendment right to bear arms
• Conspiracy to violate civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1985
• Monell liability for maintaining unconstitutional customs and practices
• Viewpoint discrimination and selective enforcement of speech policies

He asserts that Tarrant County has a known pattern of targeting First and Second Amendment activists for arrest, often filing meritless charges that are later dismissed. The lawsuit alleges this has created a chilling effect on public participation and accountability.

Grisham seeks full compensatory damages, $250,000 in punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. He also demands a jury trial.

The Case Going Forward

Filed as Grisham v. O’Hare et al., Civil Action No. 4:25-cv-716, the case now awaits a response from the County and individual defendants. It raises significant constitutional questions about the limits of public decorum rules, the treatment of armed citizens at open meetings, and the targeting of vocal government critics.

As a civil rights attorney, Grisham is representing himself in the litigation. The suit builds upon a longstanding debate in Texas about local enforcement of LEOSA credentials, public speech protections, and the boundaries of lawful government authority.

For the original reporting that helped exposed this controversy, see The Hawk’s Eye’s earlier article:

Texas Civil Rights Attorney Challenges Tarrant County Over Gun Rights Arrest

---

---

Disclaimer

The content provided in this publication is for educational and informational purposes only. The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News strives to deliver accurate and impactful stories. However, readers are advised to seek professional legal counsel and guidance for their specific legal inquiries and concerns. The publication does not assume any responsibility for actions taken by individuals based on the information presented. 

Additionally, while every effort is made to ensure the reliability of the information, the publication does not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the content. Readers are encouraged to verify any legal information with official sources and to use their discretion when interpreting and applying the information provided.

A Couple of Our Other Reads

You may be interested in our publishing on the 772 arrest notifications TCOLE received in 2024..

Or you may find our publishing on a newly elected Texas sheriff’s battle with TCOLE over the accuracy of his personal history statement of interest.  

Follow Us on Social Media

If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.

FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News

---