The Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a second city employee who was apparently fired for purely political reasons; that person is former MPD information officer Charles Johnson.
His attorney says the city may have spent about $1 million in real and staff costs to politically persecute Johnson and another city police officer, Reggie Brown; both victims of a political witchhunt at the taxpayers’ expense.
On Thursday, November 13, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled in favor of Charles Johnson in the high-profile case of Johnson v. City of Monroe, ending a legal battle that has lasted more than 5 years.
In a decisive 6-1 ruling, the court denied the City of Monroe’s writ application and lifted the stay on Johnson’s employment status, fully exonerating the former Monroe Police Department public information officer.
Supreme Court Decision Announced
The state’s highest court joined the Fourth Judicial District Court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in siding with Johnson. All three courts determined that the City’s attempt to terminate Johnson was unlawful, overruling his termination and declaring it an “absolute nullity”.
Case Background
On July 6, 2020, Johnson was involved in a phone conference with Monroe law enforcement and city attorneys about the complaint of Timothy Williams in which there was a delay in reporting a police excessive force complaint.
Johnson was informed that the complaint was a criminal matter that should be referred to the Louisiana State Police (LSP).
Johnson waited until July 13, 2020, to contact the LSP, which the city claimed was an intentional delay aimed at influencing the outcome of the upcoming Monroe mayoral election on July 11, 2020, in favor of then-incumbent mayor Jamie Mayo.
Johnson was later required to attend a pre-disciplinary hearing where inconsistencies in his statements about instructions to report the complaint and the timing of his actions were noted. He also failed a polygraph exam.
On November 23, 2020, Johnson was terminated by Police Chief Zordan, with the City citing his evasive answers and failed polygraph exam as evidence of untruthfulness.
Johnson appealed to the Monroe Fire and Police Civil Service Board, which upheld the termination after a five-day hearing.
Subsequently, Johnson and his wife filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of procedural and substantive due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as a loss of consortium claim by his wife.
Today’s decision is the end of a five-year fight.
Johnson’s attorney, Joseph P. Beck III, responded to the victory by stating, “The City’s termination of Charles Johnson has been overruled and declared an absolute nullity.
“According to the 4th JDC Court’s judgment, Charles Johnson is owed full back pay from the date of his termination until reinstatement. It is time for the City to quit playing politics and put Mr. Johnson back to work,” Beck said
Beck estimated the City spent well over a million dollars in its pursuit to terminate both Johnson and Reginald Brown, another City of Monroe employee facing similar allegations that were seen by many as politically motivated.
Impact on Charles Johnson
For Mr. Johnson, the Supreme Court ruling means his record is cleared, his termination is revoked, and he is entitled to reinstatement along with full back pay.
The decision brings vindication after years of legal strife, making it clear that the dismissal was unjust. Johnson’s victory is being hailed as a significant win for civil service protections in Louisiana.
The Case of Reginald Brown
Reggie Brown’s name also surfaced throughout the proceedings as another city employee allegedly targeted for political purposes. Brown, like Johnson, faced termination in a climate described by their legal team as hostile and driven by City Hall politics.
Both men’s cases became emblematic of broader issues of due process and political interference in public service disciplines.
The city spent well over $250,000 prosecuting Brown, only to have the court rule in his favor, with one Justice writing a dissent that claimed the case was pure politics.
What the Decision Means
This Supreme Court ruling sets a precedent for public employees facing political retaliation and underscores the importance of fair process and civil service protections.
For Johnson, it means the right to return to work, financial restitution, and public acknowledgment of his exoneration.
For the City of Monroe, it closes a costly chapter and highlights the necessity of following due process in employment actions.
