![\"\"](\"https:\/\/betterseguin.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/SilencedSpeech-1-1024x576.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\nRecent incidents involving Christian preachers and evangelists at LGBTQ Pride events raise serious questions about whether some law-enforcement officers understand that principle. In several cases, Christians speaking, preaching or distributing religious literature in public areas have been threatened with arrest, removed from public spaces, confined to isolated \u201cfree speech zones,\u201d cited or actually arrested.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These incidents reveal a troubling and recurring pattern\u2014particularly when similar incidents continue to occur in the same Texas city after lawsuits, settlements and court orders were supposed to clarify the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is not about whether everyone agrees with the message or methods of a particular street preacher. It is about whether government officials will protect the constitutional rights of everyone<\/strong>, even when the message being expressed is unpopular or considered offensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The most recent incident occurred on June 27, 2026, during Trinity Pride Fest in Fort Worth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Christian street preachers David Grisham and Richard Penkoski arrived near the event intending to preach. Video from the encounter showed officers speaking with the preachers about where they could stand and what they could say.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In one recorded exchange, an officer was asked whether police would issue a ticket because someone considered the preaching offensive. The officer answered affirmatively and referred to disorderly conduct. Another officer described certain questions involving allegedly offensive language as a \u201cgray area.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Grisham was eventually issued a disorderly-conduct citation related to what police described as unreasonable noise from a bullhorn. Fort Worth police said nearby businesses had complained that the amplified sound disrupted their operations. According to the department, officers warned that the preaching could continue without amplification, but the bullhorn was used after the warning and was seized as evidence. [1]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Fort Worth Police Department acknowledged that an officer made statements during the encounter that were \u201cnot accurate.\u201d The department announced that current officers and new trainees would receive refresher training on the First Amendment, protesters and free-speech activity. [1]<\/p>\n\n\n\n The head of the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division publicly described the footage as troubling and said her team was looking at it. As of this writing, that statement should not be described as a formal finding that anyone\u2019s rights were violated. [2]<\/p>\n\n\n\n The distinction is important. The bullhorn citation remains disputed, but a person\u2019s speech cannot lawfully become disorderly conduct merely because someone finds the religious message offensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In October 2024, Pastor Ronnie Holmes and members of his church went to the \u201cOut on the Brazos\u201d Pride event at Brazos Park East, a city-owned public park in Waco.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holmes and First Liberty Institute, members of the group were having religious conversations with event attendees when three Waco police officers stopped them and escorted them to a designated \u201cfree speech zone.\u201d The area was reportedly approximately 10 feet by 20 feet and located about half a football field away from the primary event area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The restriction was particularly concerning because the remainder of the public park reportedly remained open to the public during the event.<\/p>\n\n\n\n First Liberty later warned the city that isolating religious speakers in a distant area could violate their rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion. In July 2025, it was announced that Waco would allow members of the church to engage in religious conversations outside the designated speech zone at future events. [3]<\/p>\n\n\n\n No court entered a final judgment against Waco, and the incident did not involve a documented arrest. Nevertheless, the city\u2019s change in position was significant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A public-event permit does not ordinarily transform an entire public park into private property or give event organizers authority to exclude every opposing viewpoint from areas that remain open to the public.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The 2026 confrontation was not Fort Worth\u2019s first dispute involving Christian preaching.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2022, Christian street preacher Michael Cody Torres was arrested after an encounter with Fort Worth police outside an LGBTQ Pride event. Torres claimed officers prohibited him from using sound amplification and then arrested him as he attempted to preach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Torres filed a federal civil-rights lawsuit in January 2023. The case ended in a settlement and payment to Torres rather than a trial determining all the disputed facts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A later federal-court opinion discussing Fort Worth\u2019s history with Torres described the 2022 encounter\u2014as alleged by Torres\u2014as arguably the most problematic of the previous incidents. The court noted that the prohibition appeared to be a complete ban on amplification and that it resulted in a settlement and payment. [4]<\/p>\n\n\n\n The distinction between reasonable volume limits and a total ban is important. A city may enforce a neutral noise ordinance. It cannot selectively prohibit amplification because officials or listeners disapprove of the speaker\u2019s message.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The history goes back even further.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2014, David Grisham\u2014the same evangelist involved in the 2026 Trinity Pride Fest encounter\u2014and members of his family went to the Tarrant County Gay Pride Week Association Festival in downtown Fort Worth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The festival was free, open to the public and conducted in a public square. Grisham\u2019s wife and daughter distributed Gospel tracts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the federal-court record, Fort Worth police told Grisham\u2019s wife and daughter, under threat of arrest, that they had to leave the park. Officers escorted them across the street. When Grisham objected, an officer issued a trespass warning and told him he would be arrested if he returned to the square or adjoining sidewalk. [5]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Grisham sued the city.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The case resulted in a federal consent decree\u2014a settlement approved and entered as an enforceable court order. Fort Worth agreed that it would:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The decree preserved the city\u2019s authority to enforce lawful time, place and manner restrictions. It did not give anyone permission to obstruct an event, threaten attendees or violate neutral safety rules. [5]<\/p>\n\n\n\n The most troubling part of the 2026 incident is therefore not simply that questions arose about a bullhorn. It is that Fort Worth had already faced litigation involving the same evangelist, at another Pride event, and had entered a federal court order intended to prevent similar First Amendment problems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The concern is not limited to Texas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In June 2023, Damon Atkins was arrested for disorderly conduct after beginning to speak across the street from a Pride event in Reading, Pennsylvania. The local district attorney later withdrew the criminal charge after reviewing video of the incident and applicable law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Christian evangelist Matthew Meinecke was arrested at a Seattle Pride event in 2022 after attendees reportedly surrounded, harassed and physically confronted him while he attempted to read from the Bible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Police directed Meinecke to move instead of removing those interfering with him. When he refused to relocate, officers arrested him for obstruction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Meinecke\u2019s favor at the preliminary-injunction stage. The court concluded that police may not silence a lawful speaker simply because hostile listeners react badly to the speech. The appellate court ordered that an injunction be entered protecting Meinecke from similar enforcement. [7]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Public parks, streets and sidewalks have traditionally received the strongest First Amendment protections. Government may not restrict a person\u2019s speech in these places merely because officials or listeners disagree with the viewpoint being expressed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That protection belongs to everyone:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Government may still enforce reasonable rules concerning traffic, actual obstruction, violence, unlawful threats, access to buildings, excessive noise and other conduct. These are commonly called time, place and manner restrictions<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Those restrictions must be based on legitimate public-safety or operational concerns\u2014not the popularity, offensiveness or religious content of the speaker\u2019s message. [8]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Speech does not lose its constitutional protection simply because someone complains that it is offensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As Seguin considers controversial public events, city officials and law enforcement must be prepared to protect the constitutional rights of everyone involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That means protecting event attendees from violence, threats and unlawful disruption. It also means protecting peaceful protesters, Christian preachers and other speakers who remain in lawful public areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Before a major public event, the city should have:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The standard cannot be whether someone is offended. The standard must be whether the speaker is violating a lawful, constitutional and viewpoint-neutral rule.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Christians should not have to surrender their constitutional rights when entering a public area near a Pride event. Pride participants should not have to surrender theirs when Christians organize a public gathering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The answer is not selective enforcement. The answer is equal enforcement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We do not have to approve of every message to defend the speaker\u2019s constitutional rights. In fact, the true test of our commitment to free speech comes when the message is one we strongly oppose.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Once government officials are permitted to decide that one viewpoint is too offensive to be heard, the First Amendment no longer protects any of us reliably.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.<\/strong> Fort Worth Star-Telegram, \u201cFort Worth police receiving free speech refresher after street preacher incident,\u201d July 2, 2026; Fort Worth Police Department statement regarding the June 27 Trinity Pride Fest encounter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2.<\/strong> Dallas Express, \u201cFort Worth Pride Fest Police Video Lands on DOJ Civil Rights Chief\u2019s Radar,\u201d July 11, 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.<\/strong> KWTX, \u201cWaco church group will be free to engage in religious dialogue at Brazos River East,\u201d July 9, 2025; First Liberty Institute announcement concerning Pastor Ronnie Holmes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.<\/strong> Torres v. City of Fort Worth<\/em>, federal settlement referenced in Torres v. Fort Worth<\/em>, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, February 27, 2026; WFAA coverage of the original Pride-event arrest and lawsuit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5.<\/strong> Grisham v. City of Fort Worth<\/em>, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, September 19, 2016.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.<\/strong> Atkins v. City of Reading<\/em>, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, July 29, 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 7.<\/strong> Meinecke v. City of Seattle<\/em>, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, April 18, 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 8.<\/strong> Library of Congress, Constitution Annotated, \u201cThe Public Forum.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n This article discusses general constitutional principles and reported legal cases. It is not legal advice.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When Christian Speech Is Treated as the Problem: A Growing First Amendment Concern The First Amendment does not protect only popular speech, government-approved speech or speech that makes everyone comfortable. Its greatest value is protecting speech that others may strongly … Continue reading Fort Worth, Texas \u2014 Trinity Pride Fest, June 2026<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Waco, Texas \u2014 Christians Confined to a \u201cFree Speech Zone\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Fort Worth, Texas \u2014 Street Preacher Arrested Outside Pride Event in 2022<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Fort Worth, Texas \u2014 Arrest Threats and a Federal Consent Decree in 2014<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Similar Incidents Outside Texas<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Reading, Pennsylvania<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Seattle, Washington<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
What the First Amendment Protects\u2014and What It Does Not<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Why This Matters to Seguin<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Constitutional Rights Must Apply Equally<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nReferences<\/h2>\n\n\n\n