Palm Bay, FL – The federal lawsuit filed by Councilman Chandler Langevin against the City of Palm Bay has been settled. On February 16, 2026, both parties notified Judge Gregory A. Presnell that they had reached an “agreement in principle” and requested a 30-day stay for the City Council to approve the settlement. The following day, the judge dismissed the case without prejudice, cancelled the February 18 pretrial conference and March 3 trial, and gave the parties 60 days to file a final order or the case automatically closes.
The settlement terms are not disclosed in the court filings. What happens next depends on City Council approval and what gets disclosed publicly during that process.
Council Approval Required
The City of Palm Bay cannot settle litigation on its own authority. Under Florida law, a governmental entity requires approval from its governing body to enter into settlement agreements. The parties requested 30 days from February 16, which puts the deadline around March 18. The Palm Bay City Council meets on the first and third Thursdays of each month, so the settlement could appear on the March 6 or March 20 agenda.
Florida’s Sunshine Law (§286.011) requires the vote itself to occur in a public meeting. Whether the settlement terms will be disclosed before, during, or after that vote is uncertain. The City Attorney could present the settlement in executive session under the litigation exemption (§286.011(8)), then bring it to a public vote with minimal public detail, or the Council could choose to disclose terms during the public meeting. Court documents don’t specify.
What the Dismissal Order Says
Judge Presnell’s February 17 order dismissed the case “without prejudice” under Local Rule 3.09(b). That means if the City Council rejects the settlement within 60 days, either party can ask to reopen the case. If the Council approves it, the parties file a final dismissal order and the case closes permanently.
The order also vacated the pretrial conference scheduled for February 18 and the trial set for March 3. The case file is now effectively frozen, waiting for the Council’s decision.
Executive Session Transcripts
The City Council discussed the Langevin litigation in multiple executive sessions under the exemption in Florida Statute §286.011(8), which allows closed meetings for “strategy sessions related to litigation... when an open meeting would have an adverse effect on the settlement or litigation position of the public agency.”
Those executive session transcripts are not public records until the litigation concludes. City Attorney Patricia Smith explained in a February 14, 2026 email that Florida Attorney General Opinion 94-64 holds that litigation does not “conclude” until a final judgment is entered or becomes final on appeal. A dismissal without prejudice does not count as a conclusion because the case can be reopened within the time allowed by the court.
The transcripts will be released when either a final order is entered (if the Council approves the settlement) or the 60-day window expires without the case being reopened (approximately April 18, 2026). The Palm Bayer will obtain, analyze, and publish those transcripts as soon as they become available.
The Censure That Started It
On October 2, 2025, the Palm Bay City Council voted 4-1 to censure Councilman Langevin for social media posts about Muslims, Islam, and Indian immigrants that drew months of public outcry from residents, faith leaders, and advocacy groups. The censure resolution included removing him from committee assignments and restricting his ability to place items on meeting agendas.
Langevin’s posts began in February 2025, when he wrote that Islam “exists for the sole purpose of conquering Christendom and eradicating the Jewish people” and that Muslims “do not belong in this great nation.” In September 2025, he posted that Indians in the U.S. “are here to exploit us financially and enrich India and Indians.”
The censure vote was: Mayor Rob Medina (yes), Deputy Mayor Mike Jaffe (yes), Councilman Kenny Johnson (yes), Councilman Mike Hammer (yes), Councilman Chandler Langevin (no).
The Lawsuit
On October 20, 2025, Langevin filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, arguing the City Council’s censure and meeting rule changes violated his First Amendment rights. He claimed the restrictions were designed specifically to silence him and prevent him from representing his constituents.
The lawsuit cited Houston Community College System v. Wilson, 595 U.S. 468 (2022), in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a community college board member could sue for First Amendment retaliation when censured for his speech. The Court held he could seek a declaration that his rights were violated and an injunction to stop future violations, but could not recover money damages from the college itself.
The City’s defense argued that municipalities have broad authority to set procedural rules for council meetings, that the rules applied equally to all members, and that the City was protected by legal immunity for legislative functions.
On December 3, 2025, Judge Presnell held a hearing on Langevin’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The judge took the matter under advisement rather than issuing an immediate order, but he fast-tracked the case for a January trial. That trial never happened. The parties settled instead.
December’s Strategic Retreat
On December 18, 2025, the Palm Bay City Council passed an ordinance that changed the rules for all councilmembers, not just Langevin. The new policy requires any councilmember who wants to place an item on a future meeting agenda to receive consensus from the Council first.
Langevin voted against it, arguing the revision would restrict the Council’s ability to engage in dialog and bring new items forward. He said it could jeopardize opportunities where decisions needed to be made sooner than later. The motion carried 4-1, with Mayor Rob Medina, Deputy Mayor Mike Jaffe, Councilman Kenny Johnson, and Councilman Mike Hammer voting yes.
The ordinance applied to everyone what had previously been imposed only on Langevin. This move likely addressed the federal judge’s concerns about First Amendment retaliation by making the rule content-neutral and generally applicable. By the time of settlement, the playing field had been leveled.
What the Settlement May Address
The settlement likely covers whether the censure statement against Langevin stands or is withdrawn, who pays attorney fees, and possibly other terms the parties negotiated.
Committee assignment status is unknown. Langevin was removed from committee assignments as part of the October 2025 censure. Whether those were restored before settlement talks, remain restricted, or are part of the settlement terms is not disclosed in the court documents.
Attorney fees could be substantial. The City retained lead counsel Alec D. Russell of GrayRobinson. Langevin was represented by Anthony F. Sabatini. Federal civil rights cases can generate significant legal bills on both sides.
The December 18 ordinance already equalized the agenda placement restrictions. What remains to be resolved is the censure itself and any financial terms.
What Happens Next
The City Council will vote on the settlement at an upcoming meeting, likely in early or mid-March. The vote must occur in public session under Florida’s Sunshine Law, but the extent to which settlement terms will be disclosed publicly remains uncertain. The Council could discuss the settlement in executive session and then vote with minimal public detail, or they could disclose terms during the public meeting.
If the Council approves the settlement, the parties file a final dismissal order and the case closes. If the Council rejects it, either party can ask the judge to reopen the case within 60 days, and litigation continues.
The total cost of the lawsuit to Palm Bay taxpayers will eventually become public through invoices from outside counsel and any settlement terms that get disclosed.
The status of the Governor’s suspension request filed by Councilman Kenny Johnson in October 2025 under Florida Statute §112.51 remains pending. That is a separate matter not addressed by the settlement.
Sources
Joint Notice of Settlement (Document 61, Feb. 16, 2026)
Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice (Document 62, Feb. 17, 2026)
Florida Statute §286.011(8) (Sunshine Law litigation exemption)
Florida Attorney General Opinion 94-64 (executive session transcript release)
Palm Bay City Council Minutes (Dec. 18, 2025)
