Update on Intervention Meant to Protect Public Discussion of Viral LEGO Collection Controversy

Motion seeks removal or narrowing of court-ordered speech ban affecting popular YouTube creator Reckless Ben

BAM Franchising Inc v. Schneider 
Fourth Judicial District Court, Utah (#260402353)
United States District Court, District of Utah (2:26-cv-00593)

By G. C. Belmont
July 1, 2026

I personally filed a motion seeking limited intervention to reverse a gag order imposed on a guerilla video journalist by the Utah Fourth District Court in response to allegations of racketeering and other unlawful conduct by the company that is the target of his documentary attention.

The motion to intervene to vacate the speech restrictive TRO did not take a position on whether the allegations made by any party are true. Instead, it pointed to longstanding Supreme Court precedent recognizing that freedom of speech protects a listener's right to receive information as well as a speaker's right to share it. The motion further highlighted that prior restraints on publication are among the most disfavored forms of judicial intervention, particularly when it chills public debate, and warrants immediate repair.

By filing the motion and related pleadings, I am challenging the misuse of extraordinary emergency ex parte injunction that is suppressing constitutionally protected speech, distorting a civil dispute through unjust settlement leverage, and harming information consumers by cutting off access to speech we have a First Amendment interest in receiving.  Emergency injunctions are powerful. They may be necessary in some cases. But are too often are used to restrict speech, especially through ex parte procedures, in ways the the Supreme Court has made clear are unconstitutional. (See 2022 law review article by noted law professor Eugene Volokh,)

Copies of the primary motion and supporting procedural motions below and at: Motion to Intervene and Partially Vacate TRO (June 11th); Motion to Expedite (June 15th); Reply to Opposition (June 19th), and Notice of Changed Circumstances (June 25th).  Open source dockets: federal and state.

The matter was removed to the Utah Federal District Court on June 26th.  

UPDATE JUNE 29: Motion to Intervene is Refiled in Federal Court.

UPDATE JULY 1: Notice of Changed Circumstance and Narrowed Requested Relief.

VIDEO EXPLANATIONS: Further explanation by unaffiliated LawTube attorneys BBQ Counsellor and LegalBytes. suppress

NOTE: Despite rumors, and for the avoidance of doubt, the papers were prepared pro se with the assistance of, though not wholesale reliance on, LLMs together with other conventional legal research and drafting tools. 

See federal docket for latest filings.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comparing Federal Court Judicial Standing Orders on Artificial Intelligence

Motion Filed to Vacate Speech Restrictions on Reckless Ben

CereBel Files an Amicus Letter Brief in USA v Cohen to Assist Court's Consideration of Sanctions for Miscommunicated Citatons