City SUED for Blaming VICTIMS in Attack

Seattle now faces a federal lawsuit after its mayor blamed Christian worshipers for violence inflicted upon them by masked left-wing agitators, marking a disturbing pattern where city officials punish religious Americans for exercising constitutional rights while giving violent radicals a pass.

Story Snapshot

MayDay USA filed federal lawsuit against Seattle, Mayor Harrell, and Police Chief Barnes alleging First and Fourteenth Amendment violations after May 2025 violence
City denied group’s original permit request, then forced them into Cal Anderson Park before blaming them when masked agitators attacked with urine balloons and physical assaults
Mayor Harrell claimed Christians held rally “to provoke a reaction” despite city directing them to the LGBTQ+ neighborhood location
23 arrests made after violent confrontation where attackers threw urine, issued death threats, and masturbated in front of children
Lawsuit seeks court order forcing Seattle to remove discriminatory permitting ordinances that allow viewpoint-based treatment

City Officials Created Dangerous Trap

MayDay USA, a nationwide Christian revival organization, applied for a permit on February 6, 2025, to hold their event on Pike Street between 1st and 2nd Avenues—the identical location where they had successfully held a similar event one year earlier. Seattle officials denied this straightforward request, citing vague concerns about overcrowding and blocked sidewalk access to businesses. City officials then directed the group to Cal Anderson Park in Capitol Hill, Seattle’s most prominent LGBTQ+ neighborhood. The organizers explicitly stated they “did not desire to use Cal Anderson Park” but accepted the location only after their original permit was rejected and at the urging of city officials.

Violence Erupted Against Peaceful Worshipers

During the May 2025 permitted event, masked protesters dressed in black descended on the Christian gathering and launched brutal attacks. The violence documented in the lawsuit is shocking: attackers threw urine-filled balloons at attendees, engaged in public masturbation in front of minor children, issued verbal death threats, physically tackled worshipers to the ground, and destroyed event equipment. Seattle Police Department officers witnessed the assaults and were themselves attacked while making arrests, with some officers suffering injuries requiring medical treatment. Police ultimately arrested 23 individuals, but were forced to ask organizers to shut down their permitted religious event early due to safety concerns—a premature termination that forms a core part of the First Amendment violations alleged in the lawsuit.

Mayor Blamed Victims Instead of Attackers

Immediately following the violence, Mayor Bruce Harrell issued a public statement that became the centerpiece of the federal lawsuit. Harrell asserted that the “far-right rally was held here for this very reason—to provoke a reaction by promoting beliefs that are inherently opposed to our city’s values, in the heart of Seattle’s most prominent LGBTQ+ neighborhood.” This victim-blaming response is particularly egregious because the city itself forced the group into that location after denying their original permit request. The mayor’s spokesperson doubled down on this position, citing a pre-rally video where a pastor mentioned Pike Place as “Antifa’s headquarters,” suggesting organizers deliberately sought confrontation—even though the city rejected their Pike Street permit and directed them elsewhere.

Constitutional Rights Under Attack

The 45-page federal lawsuit filed by Liberty Counsel on September 26, 2025, alleges five counts of misconduct targeting the City of Seattle, Mayor Harrell, and Police Chief Shon Barnes. The plaintiffs claim their First Amendment rights to free speech, religious expression, and peaceful assembly were systematically violated through discriminatory permit denial, inadequate protection from violence, and forced early shutdown of their protected religious activity. The Fourteenth Amendment claims argue Seattle denied equal protection under the law by treating the religious group differently than other permit applicants and failing to provide equal security measures available to other demonstrations. Alliance Defending Freedom emphasized that “The City has a legal obligation to ensure the safety and rights of all citizens. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees people of faith equal protection to express their views without fear of violence or harassment.”

Discriminatory Pattern Threatens Religious Liberty

This case exposes a dangerous precedent where left-leaning city officials can weaponize permitting processes against religious Americans, then blame victims when violent radicals attack them. The lawsuit invokes the established constitutional principle that government cannot grant a “heckler’s veto”—allowing hostile audience reactions to justify suppressing protected speech. When faced with threatened violence against unpopular speakers, the government’s obligation is to protect the speakers rather than silence them. The plaintiffs request that a judge order Seattle to remove or amend multiple ordinances within their permitting process that infringe upon constitutional rights and allow discretionary treatment of groups based on their beliefs. If successful, this could fundamentally restructure how Seattle manages public demonstrations and establish broader precedent regarding when city officials can be held personally liable for statements that appear to justify violence against permit holders based on their viewpoint.

Local religious leaders have rallied behind the lawsuit’s claims. Pastor Russell Johnson of Pursuit NW demanded Mayor Harrell’s resignation, calling his remarks “bigoted” and accusing him of blaming “Christians for the violence” rather than holding the actual perpetrators accountable. This lawsuit represents a critical test of whether religious organizations receive equal treatment under public accommodation laws, or whether controversial religious viewpoints receive diminished protection when held in neighborhoods where those views may offend community members. The outcome will have significant implications for religious liberty, free speech doctrine, and municipal liability standards nationwide as the Trump administration works to restore constitutional protections that were eroded during years of progressive overreach.