FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE JULY 2025 Appellate Court Issues Emergency Stay in Response to Writ of Mandamus Filed to Protect Anonymous Free Speech
FRISCO, TEXAS — In a pivotal development for free speech rights in Texas, the Court of Appeals has issued an emergency stay in response to a Petition for Writ of Mandamus filed to halt an attempt to unmask an anonymous online speaker behind the “Frisco Chronicles Whistleblower” platform. The appellate court’s intervention underscores the importance of judicial safeguards in protecting First Amendment rights.
The writ was filed on behalf of the Frisco Chronicles Whistleblowers blog in the matter of Jamie Heit v. Frisco Chronicles Whistleblower, a Rule 202 proceeding in Denton County. The central issue is whether Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 202—a pre-suit deposition mechanism—can be used to compel disclosure of anonymous civic commentary.
Mandamus: A Constitutional Check on Premature Disclosure The Writ of Mandamus asks the appellate court to overturn the trial court’s June 2025 decision that granted Jamie Heit’s Rule 202 petition. The trial court had authorized a deposition to identify the individual(s) responsible for anonymous posts critical of Heit, a limited-public figure.
On July 10, 2025, the appellate court granted the emergency stay pending review of the mandamus petition.
Implications of the Mandamus and Next Steps The appellate court’s emergency stay temporarily shields the identity of certain individuals and will remain in place until the court of appeals rules on the Writ of Mandamus. What happens next:
The appellate court will review the legal arguments and determine whether the writ should be granted, thereby vacating Rule 202 petition order outright.
If the Writ is denied, the deposition may proceed, although further appellate review (including to the Texas Supreme Court) may follow.
If granted, the case will mark a significant precedent in protecting anonymous speech under Texas law.
Why This Mandamus Matters “This isn’t just about one blog or one person,” said Steven Noskin, counsel for the anonymous blog. “It’s about whether our courts will uphold the constitutional right to anonymous speech in the face of powerful interests trying to unmask critics without filing suit or meeting their legal burden.”
“Our client is not seeking to avoid accountability,” Noskin continued. “They are asserting the foundational right to speak freely. That right belongs to every concerned citizen—every parent, teacher, or taxpayer who dares to question authority.”
For media inquiries or legal commentary, please contact:
STEVEN NOSKIN, Attorney for Respondent Email: snoskin@noskinlawfirm.com Direct: (972) 214-4777 Frisco, Texas
Mr. Noskin may be available for interview or comment upon request.
We have always said we are here to be the People’s Voice! We recently received this letter and asked the parent if we could share while protecting their identity. They replied, yes! This is one parents view of Frisco ISD.
On Wednesday, May 14th, 2025 at 9:51 AM, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Dear Frisco Chronicles Editorial Team,
I read your recent coverage highlighting issues with Frisco ISD leadership, and unfortunately, I’m experiencing these failures firsthand.
I recently inquired about the possibility of keeping my children together at the same high school. One of my sons qualifies under the senior rule, and I simply asked if his sibling could attend the same school for stability. Instead of thoughtful engagement, I received cold, dismissive responses that completely disregarded our family’s situation. This wasn’t a formal request—just a parent trying to understand options for his children’s education, and even that was met with indifference.
On top of this, Texas has quietly introduced changes related to the TSI (Texas Success Initiative) exam that are now restricting students from earning dual credit. These changes were rolled out with no clear communication and directly contradict state guidelines. Instead of supporting college readiness, the law seems more focused on creating unnecessary roadblocks.
Parents like me are left with no answers, no support, and no leadership willing to even have a conversation. Frisco is a growing, diverse community, but the district leadership is operating with outdated attitudes, ignoring minority voices, and disregarding the very families they are supposed to serve.
Thank you for continuing to shed light on these issues. I hope you’ll keep pressing for answers because families like mine have been stonewalled for far too long.
Sincerely, XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX Concerned Frisco Parent and Community Member
In the interest of transparency and accountability, we are sharing a cease-and-desist letter we received and our attorney’s formal response. These communications relate to public matters we believe the community deserves to see. Our intention is not to harass, defame, or intimidate, but to clarify misinformation and stand firmly on our constitutional rights. We welcome civil and respectful dialogue.
Disclaimer:
The documents below are shared in the context of a legal dispute and public concern. They are posted for informational purposes and are not intended to threaten, harass, or defame any party. This post constitutes fair comment and republication in connection with a public controversy. Frisco Whistleblower does not accept responsibility for third-party comments and reserves the right to moderate discussion to ensure civility and compliance with platform standards. Any party objecting to the content is encouraged to contact us directly or through counsel.
Gopal Ponangi will be in the runoff against Jared Elad in June. We found Tammy Meinershagen’s comments about Gopal to be very interesting:
1) He failed to balance the ISD budget
2) He failed to communicate to voters “why” they needed the bond aka $1 billion
3) He is responsible for the failures at FISD, and she questions how he can lead the city better.
4) Tammy stated that the citizens don’t have confidence in FISD leadership.
She only left off his absence at most meetings and major votes, which we posted about previously (obtained in a PIR)
We’re curious if Tammy would say she’s responsible for the failure of the residents not understanding Proposition A and B for the Frisco Center For The Arts? Did she fail to communicate well? Does that mean she’s not equipped to help run our city? At the end of the day, that is what she implied about Gopal, right?
It will be interesting in the runoff to see if Tammy aligns herself with Gopal when she thinks he was an absolute failure on Frisco ISD school board? It might be more interesting to see if Gopal has a change of heart and supports Burt Thakur! It would make sense considering Tammy spoke so ill of John Keating and Angelia Pelham, who are huge Gopal supporters.
Oh, where will the yellow brick road take us in June?
Dark Money is a powerful documentary by Kimberley Reed about a dangerously corrupt campaign finance system that has shifted the power in politics from the people to pay-to-play corporations at the state and federal politicians. In Texas, Title 15 of the election code regulates political funds and campaigns. It was adopted by the Texas Ethics Commission and applies to candidates and officeholders in local municipalities across our state. In Texas, campaign finance reports are accessible to the public and show how much money is coming into a campaign and how much is being spent. The Texas Tribune said it best, the disclosure of the reports makes it hard to hide some kind of corrupt bargain. An individual can make a donation to a campaign, but a corporation is prohibited. The City of Frisco has campaign finance reports available online at https://www.friscotexas.gov/634/Campaign-Finance-Reports for each candidate or office holder present or past. You can also see mayor and council reimbursement reports.
I was interested to see if any individuals associated with the PGA, The Link, or Fields projects donated to any of our current sitting city council members. While doing the research it has hard to be sure a specific individual is connected to a specific project but my wife and I did our best to try and piece it together. We listed it by date, candidate, amount, the person who donated & possible association up through the year-end of 2021. The donation date, dollar amount, and donor name came directly from the council member’s campaign finance reports. The “possible association” to the project is based on what we could find from news articles, websites, city council meetings, and online research.
3/29/17 Cheney $2000 from John Wagner (Republic Property Group) – Fields
3/29/17 Cheney $1000 from John Wagner (Republic Property Group) – Fields
3/29/17 Cheney $2000 from Anthony Ruggeri (Republic Property Group) – Fields
December 4, 2018 – City Council Approves PGA
1/14/19 Woodard $750 from Chris Kleinert (Hunt Corp)
1/14/19 Woodard $750 from Michael Sinacola (Mario Sinacola & Sons – Excavating)
1/14/19 Woodard $500 from Jeff Brawner (Grogan & Brawner PC) Fields Karahan Atty
7/28/21 Woodard $500 from Jeff Brawner (Grogan & Brawner) Fields Attorneys
7/30/21 Woodard $2000 from Philip Rose (CrossTie Capital) Fields Investor
8/1/21 Woodard $1500 from Fehmi Karahan (Karahan Co) Fields
8/6/21 Woodard $1000 from Colin Fitzgibbons (Hunt Corp) Landowner
What did we learn as we followed the yellow brick road? First, we looked for donations that occurred within a few months of a vote. For example, Woodard received almost $4500 dollars in campaign contributions from individuals with connections to these projects in January 2019. That was just one month after the city council approved the PGA. While it doesn’t look good to get donations so close to a vote it could be justified as he was running for re-election in the May 2019 general election.
The same could be said for Mayor Cheney who in December 2020 received $5000 from Robert Elliott of Stillwater Capital and then in January 2020 received $30,000 + in campaign contributions from individuals associated with these projects. Most of the donations occurred between 1/27/20 to 1/31/20. The largest donor was Fehmi Karahan with $15,000. Then the city council approved the Fields project in March 2020. Cheney did run for re-election in 2020 unopposed so the public could justify the contributions. In general, it is not a good look but that will be up to the public to decide.
Another important “hot” race in 2020 was between Robert Cox, Dan Stricklin, and Laura Rummel. With them being all new candidates, why was this important? Robert Cox was Chairman of the Planning & Zoning Commission for the City of Frisco in 2020. While he did not vote on the decision he did oversee the committee which approved the Fields project on February 25, 2020. After the vote, he received about $45,000 in campaign contributions before the November 2020 election. The general public has to determine if it looks bad or is justifiable since he was running for council.
Keating & Livingston also has the same dilemma. From the end of March 2021 to July 2021 John Keating received around $14000 from individuals associated with these developments. The vote for the Link was expected to be in April 2021 but it was held over until May 2021. One would say the timing does not look good for Keating, but he was running in the May 2021 General Election. Livingston received around $6000 in September 2019 which was six months after a vote and 6 months before the next vote. No votes occurred in the immediate proximity to the timing of his donations which bodes well for him.
In a previous blog, I wrote “Pretend for a moment, everything is above board, and there is no shady shit happening but there is an appearance of wrongdoing, that appearance is just as important as reality in the minds of the public, citizens, and voters.” Frisco residents are calling for transparency and that is not an unreasonable request of those “WE” elect to office. Council members push their own personal agenda, and it is time they listen to what “WE” the citizens want. I learned that looking at campaign donations can show who is invested in certain candidates. Donations are not a sign of any wrongdoing or illegal activity, but they can create doubt or a perceived conflict of interest. It is a fine line between a simple campaign donation and a pay-to-play scheme or dark money. Matlock would say to look at it from another angle. Pretend a project is not popular with residents so they speak out against it and the council votes to pass the project. Several months later we find out that the candidate had accepted thousands of dollars from individuals involved in said project, would you believe the candidate voted for it because that is what was best for the city and residents or because they got paid? Residents should call for an end to the shady shit and ask the City of Frisco to adopt a similar policy to the City of Plano which states a campaign contribution of more than $1,000 to any city council member(s) shall create a conflict of interest based on an appearance of impropriety. Problem Solved and peace of mind for everyone!
I went to her to ask for help with an issue my child that was getting nowhere with the school,…
So whatever became of the $17 million dollars that the city council gave the Mayor to beautify a drainage ditch?
At last count, there are 3 different "spa/massage" businesses in the small office park at the northeast corner of John…
I literally just saw this. Yeah, she used to forward everybody’s emails behind their backs.
You're dropping truth bombs! These mom and pop shops are what should be the least of Karen's worries. If they…