"Trump" Kennedy Center Gets SLAPP-ed
Bravo!
As we wait to see if the Kennedy Center complies with Judge Cooper’s order to take Trump’s name off the building by June 12, the arts center lost yet another legal battle on Friday. This time it was Judge Tanya Jones Bosier of the DC Superior Court delivering the benchslap in a case involving the iconic jazz drummer Chuck Redd.
Since 2006, Redd had hosted the Center’s Christmas Eve Jazz Jam, a popular, free concert on December 24th. But in 2025, Trump promised to make the Kennedy Center “GREAT AGAIN” by firing the board and announcing “an amazing Chairman, DONALD J. TRUMP!”
For executive director, he appointed walking shitpost Ric Grenell, who proceeded to fire much of the staff and alienate the entire artistic community.
These changes precipitated an immediate wave of performer cancellations, which turned into a tsunami after the board announced that it was renaming the center for Trump.
“When I saw the name change on the Kennedy Center website and then hours later on the building, I chose to cancel our concert,” Redd told the AP.
Grenell responded with his signature tact and grace.
“Your dismal ticket sales and lack of donor support, combined with your last-minute cancellation has cost us considerably,” he sneered in a letter to Redd distributed widely to journalists. “This is your official notice that we will seek $1 million in damages from you for this political stunt.”
On March 5, the Kennedy Center made good on its threat, filing a one-count breach of contract complaint in DC Superior Court. The Center alleged that Redd “agreed to a written contract” to perform on Christmas Eve.
Note that it does not say he signed such a contract, and no copy of this contract was attached!
In this alleged contract, Redd “agreed to a morals clause” barring him from conduct that might “shock, insult, or offend the community or Center workforce or public morals or decency or prejudice Center.”
The complaint argued that Redd “breached the Agreement by abusing the position created for him by the Center as a means to publicize his personal political views instead of providing the promised musical performance.”
Was it wise for the Center to explicitly state that it was suing Redd because of his publicly stated “political views?”
It was not! Particularly since all parties agree that Redd never signed any contract.
According to Judge Jones Bosier’s order, “Redd reached out to the Center in late October to inquire about the 2025 contract, the Center explained that they were ‘finalizing a few things.’” It appears that they were finalizing the morals clause, adding a brand new term that had never appeared in Redd’s prior contracts, all of which were signed before he got on stage. The new version didn’t arrive until December 9, at which point the Center began emailing Redd daily demanding that he sign it. On December 19, he told them he was pulling out, and they canceled the outstanding AdobeSign exchange.
Those are some bad facts for the Center, particularly since DC has a robust anti-SLAPP law that allows for early dismissal, as well as fee-shifting. On March 27, Redd moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim along with special motion to dismiss under the anti-SLAPP statute. And on Friday, Judge Jones Bosier granted both of those motions.
The Center’s threadbare, four-page complaint failed to state a claim, since there was no contract, implied or otherwise, and no damages: “The Center does not proffer any expense or cost in connection with Redd beyond conclusory allegations, the Center did not lose any ticket sales as the concert was free, and the entire performance was canceled as a result of multiple artists canceling, so the Center did not incur costs for staff or other performers.” The court also quoted Grenell’s nastygram, noting that Redd’s cancellation cannot possibly be the cause of a loss of goodwill for a venue that was facing “almost certain destruction.”
All parties agree that a bunch of other performers pulled out without talking to the press, and none of them got sued. And the Center’s lawyer, Earl N. “Trey” Mayfield, III, was kind enough to draw a straight line between Redd’s brief comment to the AP and the lawsuit. (The DOJ wasn’t getting anywhere near this dumpster fire.) Unsurprisingly, the judge had no difficulty determining that this lawsuit was filed to punish protected speech.
“[T]he instant breach of contract claim sufficiently arises from Redd’s speech and expressive conduct protected under the Anti-SLAPP Act,” she wrote. “Contrary to the Center’s contention, the Center’s Amended Complaint does not merely arise from Redd’s ‘fail[ure] to show up for work.’”
And since DC’s anti-SLAPP law presumptively shifts attorney’s fees, all that’s left now is the accounting.
That’s one expensive free concert that never happened!
Rule 11 time.