[PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-12863 ____________________

JARED MCGRIFF, OCTAVIA YEARWOOD, RODNEY JACKSON, NAIOMY GUERRERO, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus CITY OF MIAMI BEACH,

Defendant-Appellee.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida USCA11 Case: 22-12863 Document: 47-1 Date Filed: 10/27/2023 Page: 2 of 17

2 Opinion of the Court 22-12863

D.C. Docket No. 1:20-cv-22583-MGC ____________________

Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and HULL, Circuit Judges. HULL, Circuit Judge: Artists Jared McGriff, Octavia Yearwood, Rodney Jackson, and Naiomy Guerrero (collectively “plaintiffs”) appeal the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of the City of Miami Beach on their First Amendment claim brought against the City under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The City contracted with the artists to create and curate a series of artworks that the City would own. The district court entered summary judgment after finding that the City’s removal of one piece of plaintiffs’ artwork constituted government speech and was immune from First Amendment scrutiny under Pleasant Grove v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (2009) and Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc., 576 U.S. 200 (2015). After review and with the benefit of oral argument, we agree and affirm the summary judgment under the particular factual circumstances of this case. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The City of Miami Beach has a troubling and regrettable history of race relations. In hopes of “sparking crucial conversations about inclusion, blackness, and relationships,” the City organized an event called “ReFrame: Miami Beach” (“ReFrame”), which included a series of art installations to be displayed on Memorial Day Weekend 2019. The City signed USCA11 Case: 22-12863 Document: 47-1 Date Filed: 10/27/2023 Page: 3 of 17

22-12863 Opinion of the Court 3

Professional Services Agreements (“the Agreements”) with plaintiffs McGriff’s and Yearwood’s production companies to, among other things, curate an installation called “I See You, Too.”1 In relevant part, the Agreements provided: • “All installations shall be subject to review and approval by the City Manager’s designee”; • “[A]ll services provided by the [production companies] shall be performed . . . to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager”; • “Any work product arising out of th[e] Agreement[s], as well as all information specifications, processes, data and findings, are intended to be the property of the City and shall not otherwise be made public and/or disseminated by [the production companies], without the prior written consent of the City Manager . . .”; and • “[T]he City will provide [the production companies] with the appropriate location to perform the services . . . .” (Font altered.)