Former DHS IT Specialist Files Federal Lawsuit Over Termination Following Secretly Recorded Date
A former Department of Homeland Security employee has initiated legal proceedings against the agency, claiming his dismissal violated constitutional free speech protections after a secretly recorded date where he criticised the department's head, Kristi Noem.
Allegations of First Amendment Violations and Political Targeting
Brandon Wright, who served as an IT specialist at DHS for eight years, filed a federal lawsuit in Washington DC on Monday, asserting that his termination earlier this month constituted unlawful retaliation for protected speech. The legal action names DHS, Secretary Noem, and an unidentified woman referred to as Heidi Doe as defendants.
Wright's legal complaint details how his employment came to an "abrupt end" following the circulation of video footage showing him discussing Noem during what he believed was a private date. The lawsuit alleges the woman he met through the Bumble dating app in January 2025 was "working for compensation and/or in conjunction" with conservative provocateur James O'Keefe and his O'Keefe Media Group.
The Controversial Recording and Subsequent Termination
According to court documents, Wright agreed to meet the woman, who identified herself as Heidi and presented as a liberal supporter of LGBTQ+ rights and feminism. During their date at a restaurant she suggested, Wright claims the conversation repeatedly turned toward politics, with the woman describing Noem as "crazy" - a characterisation Wright agreed with during their discussion.
The lawsuit states that several days after their meeting, a 13-minute video featuring edited clips from their conversation appeared on various social media platforms, including YouTube and X, accompanied by commentary from O'Keefe. Wright maintains the recording was made without his consent and presents his remarks out of context.
Following the video's circulation, DHS placed Wright on administrative leave in late January 2025 before terminating his employment on 8 January this year. The agency cited "conduct unbecoming of a federal employee" and concerns that his continued employment would signal tolerance for undermining departmental leadership.
Legal Arguments and Broader Implications
Wright's legal team, led by prominent attorney Mark Zaid, argues that his "intended private expression of personal opinions, especially during nonduty hours, is quintessential protected speech on a matter of public concern." The lawsuit contends that government employees retain First Amendment rights to discuss matters of public importance without fear of retaliation.
Zaid characterised the termination as representative of efforts to suppress dissent within federal agencies, stating: "The First Amendment permits individuals to hold and express opinions that might be critical of the US Government, even when that individual might be a federal employee."
Additional Allegations of Harassment
The legal complaint further details disturbing incidents Wright experienced following the date, including:
- Threatening voicemails from unknown numbers stating "You're famous, buddy" and predicting job loss
- A text message containing a screenshot of his former residence with references to a "honeypot scheme"
- Claims that he reported these incidents to his supervisor before disciplinary action was taken
Neither O'Keefe nor his media organisation are named as defendants in the current lawsuit. Representatives for O'Keefe did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the allegations.
The Department of Homeland Security has declined to comment on the ongoing litigation. The case raises significant questions about the boundaries of free speech protections for government employees and the methods used to obtain potentially damaging information about public servants.
