A former Los Angeles County sheriff is pursuing a federal appeals case against county officials over his placement on an employment blacklist that he claims has damaged his reputation and future career prospects.
Alex Villanueva, who served as sheriff from 2018 to 2022, appeared before a three-judge panel at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday, seeking to overturn a lower court’s dismissal of his lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. The former law enforcement official alleges that board members violated his First Amendment rights and defamed him by ensuring he was placed on a ‘do not rehire’ list following his departure from office.
Villanueva initially won election in 2018 on a reform platform but shifted his political stance during his tenure, becoming a vocal critic of what he characterized as the ‘woke left’ among county leadership. His administration was marked by controversy, including his refusal to enforce Covid-19 vaccination mandates and resistance to investigations into alleged deputy gangs within his department. These positions made him a frequent guest on conservative media outlets but ultimately contributed to his electoral defeat in 2022 by Robert Luna.
The lawsuit, filed in 2024, centers on allegations that the five-member Board of Supervisors orchestrated his placement on the employment blacklist as retaliation for his political views and public criticism of county leadership. According to Villanueva’s legal team, the designation severely limits his employment opportunities within county government and negatively impacts his broader career prospects.
During Thursday’s hearing, attorney Alex DiBona argued that his client had been deterred from pursuing consulting positions with the city attorney’s office or the sheriff’s department due to the blacklist status. DiBona emphasized that beyond practical employment barriers, the designation caused significant reputational harm, particularly given that it stemmed from accusations of discrimination and harassment by two county employees.
The employees in question were Max Huntsman, the former inspector general of Los Angeles County, and Esther Lim, a former deputy to Supervisor Janice Hahn. Villanueva and Huntsman had engaged in public disputes during the sheriff’s tenure, with Villanueva at one point referring to Huntsman as ‘Max-Gustaf’ and making unsubstantiated claims that Huntsman was a Holocaust denier.
U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson had previously dismissed the case on summary judgment, finding that Villanueva failed to provide evidence that the employment designation had actually affected him or that the oversight panel responsible for the decision was motivated by his political criticism of the board.
Ellie Ruth, representing the county, countered that the ‘do not rehire’ notation was simply an internal human resources designation based on findings from an investigation into the harassment and discrimination complaints. She noted that the designation would have remained confidential had Villanueva himself not disclosed it to media outlets during an interview. Ruth also emphasized that the Board of Supervisors was not involved in the decision to apply the designation.
The appeals panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Jay Bybee, Daniel Collins, and Daniel Bress, questioned both sides extensively about the nature of the employment designation and its potential impacts. Judge Collins notably pressed DiBona on whether Villanueva’s own conduct, including the Holocaust denier accusation, might warrant disciplinary notation in employment records.
Since leaving the sheriff’s office, Villanueva has attempted to return to public office through electoral politics but has been unsuccessful. He lost a primary election for county supervisor to incumbent Janice Hahn and was defeated again in a recent rematch against Sheriff Luna.
The case raises questions about the intersection of political speech, employment consequences, and the rights of former public officials. The panel took the matter under submission without indicating when they might issue a ruling.
Leave a Reply