Walker v. Tripp
- Louis Stanton
- 1:24-cv-09783
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Walker v. Tripp, Judge Stanton dismissed Walker’s First Amendment claim because the radio director’s refusal to broadcast his speech was not governmental interference.
Levan A. Walker’s federal First Amendment claim was dismissed against Ann Tripp. Any state-law claims Walker may have been asserting were left outside the court’s supplemental jurisdiction, and judgment was directed to be entered.
What happened
In Walker v. Tripp, Levan A. Walker, who represented himself, sued Ann Tripp, a radio director at WBLS, alleging that she violated his freedom of speech by declining to broadcast his speech. Walker sought between $250,000 and $2,000,000 in damages.
The court explained that the First Amendment restricts government interference, not the directorial decisions described in Walker’s complaint. Because Walker could not state a claim under the law that allows constitutional claims against government actors, the court found that amending the complaint would be futile.
Judge Stanton dismissed the complaint, declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims Walker may have been asserting, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court did not grant leave to amend.
The detailed version
- Walker v. Tripp · No. 1:24-cv-09783
- Louis Stanton
- June 20, 2025
Background
Levan A. Walker appeared without a lawyer and sued Ann Tripp, identified in the complaint as a radio director at World’s Best Looking Sound, also called WBLS, in Manhattan. Walker alleged that Tripp violated the First Amendment by declining to broadcast his speech on WBLS’s airwaves. He said he contacted the station in 2024 seeking permission to announce a “cease fire” and later went to the station to discuss the request. He alleged that Tripp and others conspired to neglect his constitutional right to speak on the radio. Walker alleged that he suffered paranoia and sought between $250,000 and $2,000,000 in damages.
The court had previously allowed Walker to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Under the screening law for such cases, the court must dismiss a complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a legally valid claim, or seeks money from a defendant who is immune from that relief. The court also explained that it had to dismiss a case over which it lacked authority to hear the subject matter, while reading filings by people without lawyers generously.
Analysis
The court treated Walker’s First Amendment allegation as a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a statute that permits claims for violations of federal constitutional rights when the defendant acted under government authority. The court stated that the First Amendment protects freedom of speech from governmental interference. It concluded that the First Amendment did not apply to Tripp’s directorial decisions and that Walker could not use it to require Tripp to broadcast his speech on WBLS. The court therefore dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
The court declined to allow Walker to amend because it determined that the defects in his complaint could not be fixed through amendment. After dismissing the federal claims, the court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning authority over related state-law claims, concerning any state-law claims Walker may have been asserting.
Disposition
The court dismissed Walker’s complaint, declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims he may have been asserting, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The order did not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.