A Manchester, Tennessee, woman was taken to court by the city, which claimed that her numerous record requests regarding the sewer system were intentionally "disrupting the government."
Resident Sarah Bradley has filed a countersuit, claiming the city has violated her First Amendment rights.
Here's what to know
After three years of requests "about unpermitted fill sites, sanitary sewer overflows into the Little Duck River, Bonnaroo dumping, Land Use Subcommittee meetings, and where the city's money goes," the city took action to ban her from making any further requests without court approval for a full year in July, per the Nashville Tennessean.
Manchester officials said Bradley's filings were intended to interfere with city operations. The city cited "six or more" document requests, along with others submitted since late 2023, and relies on a 2021 Tennessee law that permits courts to restrict requests when there is evidence they were intended to be disruptive.
On August 13, Bradley countersued, calling the city's complaints "both trivial and a basic governmental responsibility." According to the Tennessean, she used the Tennessee Public Records Act to examine the city's sewer operations, grant spending, employee discipline, and environmental compliance.
Why is this significant?
Many of Bradley's requests centered on wastewater, sewer overflows, and public accountability surrounding infrastructure that can directly affect local waterways and public health. Her countersuit states that some of her findings were shared with federal and state regulators.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
According to Thunder Radio, Manchester was hit with a $146,000 fine in February after state environmental officials said 108 sanitary sewer overflows occurred from January through December 2025. Those events reportedly resulted in more than 25 million gallons of discharge.
She also argues that the city has exaggerated the burden her requests created. The Tennessean reported her filing says the biggest documented expense over three years and across multiple departments was "just fifteen staff hours, 182 copies, and $483.81."
What's being done?
Bradley is asking the court to require the city to respond to her filings, and she is also seeking damages and costs. Her legal team is framing the case as a significant test of whether local officials can use the courts to punish residents for sustained vigilance.
Daniel Horwitz, a First Amendment attorney representing Bradley, sharply criticized the city's lawsuit, saying. "A city deciding to sue one of its own citizens for keeping too close an eye on her government is an outrageous abuse of state power that should offend every decent member of society."
Manchester City Mayor Joey Hobbs has defended the city's position, saying Manchester is "committed to transparent government and the right for citizens to have access to records," while also describing Bradley's requests as "voluminous and unclear." He added that the city believes she has filed requests "that number in the hundreds."
Bradley's filing states, "A citizen does not forfeit First Amendment rights by using them frequently or by asking too many questions of government officials who would rather not engage citizens or be held to account."
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
