Judge hears Crook case - decision to come next week

Creston community members are waiting on a decision regarding the status of Creston Community School District teacher Melisa Crook following a Facebook comment on Sept. 10 regarding the death of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.

After a two-day preliminary injunction hearing between Crook and the district, beginning Thursday, Dec. 11, Federal Judge Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger has promised to make a decision soon after the Dec. 22 file briefing deadline. She also extended a temporary restraining order for Crook against the defendants through Jan. 14, 2026. The temporary restraining order was first issued in October to stop the school board from holding a termination hearing for Crook.

“The defendants are [prohibited] from taking any other adverse employment actions against Plaintiff Melisa Crook based on the Notice of Recommendation to Terminate prepared by defendant Deron Stender,” Goodgame Ebinger wrote in the order. “Defendants are further [prohibited] from taking any adverse employment actions against Crook based on her Facebook comment.”

Throughout the trial, seven witnesses were called to the stand, including Crook and defendant Superintendent Deron Stender. Goodgame Ebinger reminded both legal teams throughout the trial that the goal was to prove if irreparable harm was done to Crook and if the first amendment was broken. Both sides also worked to explain what had caused a bigger disruption, Crook’s post or her absence.

Plaintiff’s stance

Crook, represented by Christy Ann Aumer Hickman, Bekcy S. Knutson and Katie Schoolen of the Iowa State Education Association, along with Melissa C. Hasso of Hasso and Wilson Law Firm, argued that she had suffered both irreparable harm and that the school went against her first amendment rights, citing direction from the district not to come to school events or talk to colleagues in any capacity, not just as an employee.

The plaintiff also stated that she and other teachers were now afraid to say anything publicly for fear of retribution. Regarding irreparable harm, the plaintiffs said that if there had been no restraining order, the school planned to fire Crook. This would result in a notice about her firing sent to any future employer, further compounding damage to her reputation and ability to find another job.

They claim that Stender contacted his attorney immediately, not waiting for any complaints or threats, and instead looking into terminating Crook right away. They also referenced Kennedy v. Bremerton, a case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 regarding a coach at the Bremerton school district praying before games. Like in Kennedy’s case, what Crook did was off of school hours, so the plaintiffs argued the school district could not discipline her actions taken off the clock.

Defense’s stance

The defense, represented by Janice M. Thomas and Ryan Tunink of Lamson, Dugan & Murray, as well as Kristy Michelle Latta of Ahler & Cooney (only representing the district as a whole), argued that termination is not irreparable harm. They said Crook had no proof that she was prevented from speech due to the incident.

Additionally, they said they believe Crook’s post caused a significant disruption and the district took appropriate action. While Stender began taking action before any phone calls or distress to the school district, they said this is allowable due to Wendt v the city of Denison, in which disruption doesn’t need to happen, there just needs to be a reasonable belief that it will happen. Additionally, while there was only one threat, found to be unsubstantiated, students were scared, and their safety needed to be taken seriously.

Safety

During the trial, Union County Sheriff Brian Bolton said on the witness stand that he first got a call from East Union’s superintendent requesting extra patrol on Sept. 11 since Crook still had in her Facebook bio that she was a teacher at East Union.

The next day, Bolton said he received a text from Stender asking for more law enforcement presence. He testified Stender said there was a threat reported by a student that proved to be unsubstantiated, but an off-duty deputy, paid for by the school district, was still placed at the school for all times of operation. Additionally, Bolton said he came to the elementary school that day with his crisis K-9 to interact with students during recess. When asked by the judge if he did an independent threat assessment, Bolton responded that he did not.

Creston High School Assistant Principal and Activities Director Scott Driskell explained how the unsubstantiated threat came to be, saying a conversation in the girls locker room was taken out of context after a student said they wouldn’t be surprised if the school became a target.

Parents submitted affidavits for both sides, some saying they would pull their children out of the district if Crook remained, while others said Crook was a great teacher and had no worries of safety for their children.

“The post angered me because it was celebrating the murder of another person. I was also concerned regarding the potential effect Crook’s post would have on student safety,” parent Matt Strauss said. “Crook’s conduct upsets me enough that if Crook were allowed to teach, I would pull from children from Creston Community School District and send them to a different school.”

“My son was a student in Melisa Crook’s English class during the 2024-25 and 2025-26 school years. In the days and weeks following reports concerning the shooting of public figure Charlie Kirk, [my son] attended school and observed the educational environment and daily operation of the high school,” parent Stephanie Anderson said. “There were no unusual conditions, events or significant disruptions that negatively impacted his schooling. I never felt [my son] was in danger and I never had the sense that the social media post by Melisa Crook placed [my son] in danger.”

Due to reported student and parent fears, Driskell and Creston High School Principal Bill Messerole said they and other administrative staff brought their rolling desks out to the school’s various entrances. While the goal was to ease students’ fears, both say this caused disruption to their work, as they were unable to complete all necessary tasks while away from their normal offices.

Disruption

The defense says more than just these two had disruptions to their daily tasks. CCSD IT, Web and Social Media Coordinator Teri Keeler said complaints regarding Crook’s comment resulted in a delay of job training.

Keeler was originally supposed to learn about billing for a new job role, but instead spent most of the day dealing with phone calls and emails regarding the situation. Keeler said she was asked by Stender to make a record of all the phone calls. When cross-examined, Keeler said she did not personally view any student education being disrupted, nor could she verify if the phone calls were from local numbers. She said she was able to complete her training the following week.

Addison Downing, the superintendent’s administrative assistant and in charge of accounts payable, said in her affidavit that so many of the calls received in the office were verbally aggressive and combative, she and Keeler decided to send each caller to voicemail “rather than be berated.”

Stender, Messerole and Driskell all referenced the topic causing disruption in the classroom, but various teachers brought forward via witness stand or affidavit refuted this claim.

Creston High School math teacher Elisa Soosloff said on the witness stand that she had seen no disruptions in her class until an announcement was made over the loudspeakers that a threat the school district had heard about was unsubstantiated.

Following this announcement, Soosloff said she had only two questions from students. One student asked why an announcement was made over the loudspeakers if there was no threat, as most students in the classroom had not been previously aware of the situation. Because of this, another student asked if the classroom door could be locked, just in case, which Soosloff did.

Lisa Sawtelle, a substitute teacher working at the school the first days of Crook’s suspension, said in an affidavit that while she was prepared for disruption, nothing came.

“During these days that I was substitute teaching, I personally saw no disruption at the school as a result of Ms. Crook’s post. ... The only minor disruption occurred when [law enforcement] walked by in the hallway,” Sawtelle said. “Ms. Crook’s absence is a real and disruptive loss to the school and her students. Reinstating her will bring this disruption to an end and get the kids’ education back on track.”

Multiple teachers and students submitted similar statements, stating the biggest disruption was the lack of Crook in the classroom.

“Since Ms. Cook was suspended, I feel like my learning in English has been impacted in a negative way,” a student wrote in an affidavit. “The work that we are doing in class is less challenging than when Ms. Crook was teaching. I am finding myself less interested in what we are doing in class and it has been harder to focus on doing my work.”

Complaints

A majority of the calls and emails received by the school district came from outside the school district, many even from other states. The phone call transcriptions and emails are among the exhibits in the lawsuit.

A Colorado phone number said she hoped the district had been flooded with calls regarding the social media comment, while another call said, “Hey Melisa Crook. So, we’re taking a little gander at your little post there huh. You little fu— c—. You murderer. You’re just so fu— disgusting. I mean, who the hell is allowing you to be around children? You are one vile, demented scumbag. One way or another we’re gonna make sure you get fired and we’re working on it hard, honey. We’re gonna make sure you’re publicly humiliated at work, at home, in the community, just watch your fu— back. Because we’re gonna be there saying remember you? What you did?”

Of the 111 emails and 140 phone calls received, CCSD HR and Personnel Director Taylor Royster indicated in his affidavit that 10 were locals in support of Crook and 15 asking for Crook’s firing. All other calls or emails were from out of the area, repeat calls or not about the situation.

This hearing is solely to determine whether or not to block the school board from terminating Crook. If the injunction is granted, Crook will regain her status as a teacher at CCSD.

Further court proceedings will occur as Crook is pursuing legal action against the school district, school board, Stender as superintendent and an individual and Don Gee as board president and an individual.