The Dangerous Precedent of Derrick Wilburn’s Lawsuit Against Bernadette Guthrie
When Hypocrisy Meets Intimidation: A Dangerous Precedent for Free Speech, Public Education, and Accountability
In Academy District 20, a controversy is brewing that strikes at the heart of free speech, public education, and community advocacy. Derrick Wilburn, a school board member in Colorado Springs, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Bernadette Guthrie, a parent and outspoken advocate for accountability in public schools. This lawsuit is not just an attack on one parent — it’s a dangerous precedent that could embolden public officials nationwide to use legal intimidation as a weapon against dissent.
How Did We Get Here?
This saga began in October 2023, during a student-led candidate forum at Chinook Trail Middle School. Derrick Wilburn, then a candidate for the school board, chose to read explicit and graphic passages from the novel Push by Sapphire, ostensibly to illustrate his concerns about inappropriate materials in school libraries. The audience included children as young as elementary school age, including Bernadette’s 11-year-old daughter.
Understandably, Bernadette, like any parent, was horrified. Her daughter was traumatized, and Bernadette has since worked tirelessly to hold Wilburn accountable for what she — and many others — see as a reckless and inappropriate display.
Her advocacy, however, has come at a steep personal cost. Wilburn, instead of addressing concerns with humility or compassion, escalated the situation by filing a defamation lawsuit against Bernadette. The complaint accuses her of a “relentless campaign of malicious defamation” and seeks damages for what Wilburn alleges are false and defamatory statements.
To be fair, Bernadette did not hold back. She shared strong opinions during public comment periods at school board meetings and on social media, openly criticizing Wilburn’s actions with sharp language and passionate rhetoric. However, it’s important to note that some of the accusations Wilburn has made against her are not accurate. In some instances, Bernadette was relaying sentiments and criticisms that originated from Colorado Republican Party leadership, who were similarly alarmed by Wilburn’s behavior.
Bernadette also firmly believes her statements to be true because she saw firsthand the profound effect Wilburn’s stunt had on her daughter, including the fear and anxiety it caused. This wasn’t theoretical or abstract — it was deeply personal. Academy District 20 executive leadership seemed to share in Bernadette’s concern, going so far as to implement a safety plan for her daughter in the event that Wilburn visited her school or she otherwise encountered him in a school setting. This response from district leadership underscores the seriousness of the situation and validates Bernadette’s concerns about her child’s well-being. Her advocacy was not born out of malice, but out of a mother’s instinct to protect her child and ensure accountability for actions that harmed her family.
A Clear Stance on Book Bans
To be very clear, I do not support book bans. Public schools and libraries are not, and should never be, conservative, liberal, or religious institutions. They exist to serve the entire community, and the materials they offer should reflect a wide range of viewpoints. This ensures that every student can see themselves reflected in literature while also being exposed to the incredible diversity of the world around them.
Decisions about what materials are included in school and public libraries are made by trained, educated professionals. These librarians and educators are well-equipped to determine the age appropriateness of books, a point that Wilburn and others conveniently skip over in their rhetoric.
The novel Push, for example, is not randomly or widely available to students in Academy District 20. It is housed in a single high school library, where its mature subject matter is accessible only to students who are at an appropriate age to process its themes. Wilburn’s attempt to conflate the availability of a book in a high school library with the idea that it is “forced” upon children as young as elementary school is disingenuous and misleading.
We do not live in a world where we can shelter students from reality forever. A robust library collection exposes them to diverse experiences, perspectives, and histories — both the beautiful and the difficult. What Wilburn and others advocating for selective book removal fail to understand is that education is about equipping students to navigate the world, not shielding them from it.
Or maybe they understand that all too well.
The Hypocrisy in Wilburn’s Own Words
Just months before the candidate forum, Wilburn penned an op-ed in May 2023, railing against what he described as “pornography” in schools. He lambasted schools for including certain books in their libraries, claiming that this content was entirely inappropriate for children. He wrote:
“Parents have every right to say that they don’t want pornography in their kids’ schools. In a world with one iota of moral sanity, that is not only non-controversial, but it should be expected.”
Yet, just a few months later, Wilburn chose to publicly read what he himself classified as “pornography” in front of children at a student-led event. He did so knowing the audience included elementary and middle school students, including Bernadette’s young daughter.
Wilburn’s stunt not only traumatized children but exposed his glaring hypocrisy. If this material was too graphic to be in school libraries, how could he justify reading it aloud to kids? Wilburn’s actions demonstrate a complete disregard for the standards he claimed to uphold and for the well-being of the very children he now represents.
Derrick Wilburn’s Pattern of Intimidation and Controversy
Wilburn’s actions didn’t occur in isolation. He has a long history of inflammatory rhetoric and bullying behavior. I know this personally because, in leaked Discord chats, Wilburn referred to me — a parent and vocal advocate for public education — as a “hardcore anti-Christian Satanist.” This claim was made evidently because I regularly speak out against Seven Mountains Dominionism, a religious-political ideology that seeks to impose Christian nationalist control over public institutions, including schools.
But Wilburn didn’t stop there. In the same conversation, he joked about a “prayer” from televangelist John Hagee that imagined me and others being hit by a brick from God. Let that sink in: an elected official, entrusted with the welfare of children, entertained fantasies of violence against a parent simply for holding him accountable.
This is not the first time Wilburn has faced scrutiny for his rhetoric. In 2017, Wilburn was named in a defamation lawsuit alongside conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and others. The lawsuit was filed by Brennan Gilmore, a counter-protester at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, where Heather Heyer was tragically killed by a white supremacist. Wilburn and others were accused of spreading conspiracy theories that falsely implicated Gilmore in orchestrating the rally’s violence.
The case was ultimately settled in 2022, with Wilburn admitting liability and agreeing to a financial settlement (filing 392). This pattern of spreading falsehoods and engaging in harmful rhetoric underscores why so many in the Academy District 20 community are alarmed by his actions.
A Growing Demand for Accountability
Wilburn’s controversial actions have sparked outrage and galvanized the community. Over 300 people have signed a petition calling for him to be held accountable for what they argue is a violation of Colorado obscenity law. The petition underscores the deep frustration and concern many parents and community members feel about Wilburn’s behavior.
Derrick Wilburn’s lawsuit against Bernadette Guthrie is a stark reminder of the challenges we face in safeguarding democracy, free speech, and public education. But it’s also an opportunity to rally together in support of those who refuse to be silenced.
Wilburn’s hypocrisy — decrying “pornography” in schools while reading it aloud to children — exposes the disingenuousness of his agenda. Coupled with his history of spreading harmful conspiracy theories, intimidating critics, and misusing his position to advance a narrow ideological agenda, it paints a clear picture of a public official unfit to represent our community.
We don’t need bullies, hypocrites, or opportunists running our schools. Wilburn wants us to believe he’s protecting children, but his actions show that the only thing he’s protecting is his ego.