Can US Judges be Kentucky Colonels?

Supreme Court: HOKC, Inc. v. Col. David Wright, et. al.

The following represents an independent judicial perspective on a case that underscores the misuse of corporate legal mechanisms to suppress free speech and the shadowy commercial monopolization of a public-domain title by a charitable corporation, "Kentucky Colonel" based on manipulating a historical account resulting in revisionism and the creation of a false designation of origin violating 15 U.S. Code § 1125 which protects the iconic historical title from serving as a trademark. 

This analysis draws from historical precedent, constitutional protections, and the intrinsic role of Kentucky colonels as goodwill ambassadors, storytellers, and tourist attractions for the Commonwealth. It is an important case because thousands of judges, elected officials, artists, celebrities, and most presidents are also afforded the title of the Kentucky Colonel that do not directly acknowledge or credit the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels, Inc. for their good fortune to be appointed and commissioned. This transparent and unbiased perspective and opinion is hereby submitted 'Anonymously' by a Federal Judge who is a Kentucky Colonel and has reviewed the case(s); it should be offered for consideration in jurisprudence.

If I were not Anonymous I could not offer my opinion, or speak out. -US Judge, Kentucky Colonel

Context and Origins of the Dispute

In January 2020, Colonel David Wright initiated negotiations with the Board of the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels, Inc. (HOKC) for a potential merger of his independent efforts with theirs. This proposal, which included Wright joining their staff after 23 years of voluntary service, was submitted to the court as sealed evidence, so perhaps it was never read. Despite this, in February 2020, the HOKC, represented by Mr. Cornelius "Corky" Coryell of the Wyatt Firm, filed a lawsuit against Wright. 

The legal action was retaliatory, it targeted Wright's exercise of free speech and advocacy, including:

1. Contacting the Governor of Kentucky about concerns with the HOKC and the nomination procedures' flaws which he identified under Governor Bevin.
   
2. Sharing Kentucky Colonel history, news, stories, and advocacy through blogs, social media, television, and newspapers.
3. Mobilizing Kentucky Colonels to form an international collective based on historical traditions of goodwill ambassadorship, promoting tourism development and civilian officer diplomacy.

Rather than fostering dialogue, the HOKC filed for three new trademarks for "KENTUCKY COLONELS" and initiated a 1,000-page Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) against Wright, seeking over $1 million in damages. This legal strategy sought to monopolize the title "Kentucky Colonel," a public-domain term intertwined and rooted deeply in 18th and 19th-century state heritage and national history. Despite Wright's affirmative defenses, counter-claims and sources predating the HOKC's existence, the court ignored his pro-se motions with deference upholding the HOKC case.

Judicial Actions and Bias: An Overview

Initial Proceedings

1. The original judge recused himself due to his status as a Kentucky Colonel.
2. The newly assigned judge issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) within seven days, restricting Wright’s speech without thorough review of his affidavit.
3. A hearing was held without fully considering Wright's defense, leading to an extended TRO and the judge's subsequent recusal for undisclosed reasons.
4. A new Judge took over the case and refused to hear Col. Wright's Answer and Affirmative Defenses in due process after placing a Preliminary Injunction.

Ignored Precedents and Defenses

Key legal precedents, such as HOKC, Inc. v. Building Champions, LLC, which affirmed the basketball team's use of "Kentucky Colonels," were overlooked. Wright’s constitutional defenses and historical references were also dismissed without review, most likely because of his pro-se status.

Magistrate Court and Settlement

The case was transferred to Magistrate Court, where Wright, representing himself, filed numerous motions and evidence that went largely unreviewed. During a confidential settlement conference in December 2020, the parties reached an agreement that:

1. Dismissed the case, affirming no infringement by Wright.
2. Imposed an Agreed Permanent Injunction, restricting Wright’s commercial use of "Kentucky Colonels" but granting specific rights in Clause 5, which the HOKC and courts subsequently disregarded.

Renewed Litigation: 2023

In 2023, the HOKC filed a second lawsuit, alleging violations of the 2020 injunction. Key accusations included:

1. Informing Kentucky Colonels of their right to use the (TM) symbol under common law.
2. Encouraging the creation of personal badges and civil officer identification cards, a historical tradition among Kentucky Colonels.
3. Sharing public-domain historical articles about Kentucky Colonels.

The court ruled against Wright without specifying which clauses of the injunction were violated. The decision demonstrated deference to HOKC’s corporate interests over constitutional rights.

Broader Implications and Historical Context

This case raises significant concerns about corporate overreach and the monopolization of public-domain titles. Congressman Edward Creal’s 1936 Congressional Address about the Kentucky Colonel Title affirmed the title’s role as a symbol of civic leadership and goodwill, not as an exclusive corporate entity. This 1936 address clearly distinguishes the Kentucky Colonel as a piece of Kentucky's History and Heritage that cannot be owned by the HOKC. 

The actions against Wright undermine this legacy, replacing inclusivity with control, prohibiting the academic and literary pursuit of the Origin of the Kentucky Colonel and the allegation that Old Kentucky was not controlled by anything except Kentucky colonels. Historical records highlight the title’s evolution from its origins under the first, second and 19th-century Kentucky governors to its flourishing role as a symbol of service and goodwill from the exonym title's humble roots as character in an 1833 two-act farce originated at the Covent Garden Theater in England for Colonel Nimrod Wildfire as stated in Philadelphia. Pennsylvania. 

Conclusion: Recommendations for Justice

The judicial and historical record supports the following actions:

1. Vacate the Cases: The lawsuits against Colonel David J. Wright should be vacated, as they reflect a pattern of bias and corporate overreach. It is clear that the case against Wright would have gone much differently if the court was aware that Wright was a donor, member and volunteer for 23 years at the time the case was filed, and that Wright created the first website for Kentucky Colonels in 1998.
2. Exonerate Wright: Wright should be fully exonerated of all liabilities, including court costs, attorney fees, and sanctions by the HOKC's attorney who brought the SLAPP case as a penalty in itself against an individual's reputation that is clearly in retaliation against exercising free speech. Wright needs to recover his goodwill and reputation of honor and trust following defamation. 
3. Governor’s Intervention: The Governor of Kentucky should issue a formal declaration or special civil pardon to protect Wright as one of its Civilian Goodwill Ambassadors and preclude other Kentucky Colonels from further corporate litigation by the HOKC relative to their status as Kentucky colonels. It would affirm the Kentucky Colonel is public domain.
4. Public Clarification: The HOKC should transparently acknowledge its role as a philanthropic organization without exclusive authority or true sense of fraternity over Kentucky colonels historically or their traditions. The HOKC has no claim to the ideas or any continuity with organizations that preceded it, there are no similarities.
5. Preserve Historical Integrity: Kentucky Colonels for lack of a genuine history based in honor need to recognize Wright’s extensive research and advocacy as vital to preserving the traditional icon of the Kentucky Colonel, ensuring these customs and traditions remain accessible to all.
6. Recall the HOKC 1813 Narrative: The HOKC narrative (myth) should not have been adopted or understood as a factual origin by anyone in government nor should the state let anyone assume that the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels Myth of 1813 is true. This was clearly known and affirmed by Col. Michael Adams in February of 2021, when he published a new Kentucky Colonels state narrative created by Col. David Wright for the Secretary of State's office which was checked, edited and vetted, considering Col. Charles S. Todd, served as a Secretary of State and not as a Kentucky Colonel as the office was led to believe. The SOS edited version was removed but should be republished and replaced. 

My anonymous judicial analysis highlights the need for fairness, equity, and the preservation of First Amendment rights for all Kentucky Colonels whether you donate to the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels or decide to support the ideals of customary or traditional colonelcy from 1775 until present day starting with "The Colony of Transylvania" documented by noted colleague Chief Justice Walter Clark of North Carolina in 1904. The Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels in Louisville is just one of many possible organizations that promote the ideas of different kinds of Kentucky colonels. It is a call to uphold justice, historical accuracy, and the collective legacy of Kentucky colonels as advocates and goodwill ambassadors of the Commonwealth.

The Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels, Inc. v. Kentucky Colonels International (3:20-cv-00132) is a civil rights case against Col. David Wright disguised as a trademark complaint against his rights to incorporation as a non-profit organization. The court overlooked and was not aware of the Colonel's rights as a 23 year member of the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels. The case is on appeal in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio and will most likely heard in 2025 if the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels does not offer a resolution.