Boise State University-Big City Coffee First Amendment Case Advances to Idaho Supreme Court With $5.2 Million at Stake
The long-running legal battle between Boise State University and former Big City Coffee owner Sarah Jo Fendley has reached a pivotal new stage, as the Idaho Supreme Court begins reviewing a case that carries more than $5.2 million in taxpayer money and significant questions about First Amendment rights on Idaho’s public university campuses. More than a year after the initial appeal was filed, the case is now working its way through the state’s highest court with no hearing date yet scheduled, leaving the timeline for a final resolution uncertain.
Background: A Coffee Shop, a Campus, and a First Amendment Fight
The dispute traces back to October 2020, when Fendley closed her Big City Coffee shop located in the Boise State University library. Fendley has maintained that she was effectively pushed off campus because of her vocal public support for law enforcement — a position that drew opposition from a student activist group on campus. The case went to trial in Ada County in 2024, spanning nine days before a jury returned a verdict in Fendley’s favor.
That jury found that two former Boise State administrators — Alicia Estey and Leslie Webb — played an active role in ousting Fendley from campus. The verdict totaled $3.6 million, with an additional $1.6 million in legal fees awarded to Fendley. Webb was specifically ordered to pay $1 million in punitive damages as part of the total award. Both administrators have since left Idaho.
Key Arguments Now Before the Idaho Supreme Court
In recent weeks, attorneys for both sides filed their opening briefs with the Idaho Supreme Court, laying out the arguments that will shape the case going forward.
Attorneys for Estey and Webb, led by W. Christopher Pooser, argue that the administrators took no sides in the dispute between Fendley and student activists and were simply honoring the First Amendment rights of all parties involved. “Boise State has no duty to suppress or censor one group to support another,” Pooser wrote in his March 6 brief.
Pooser also argues that as public officials, Estey and Webb are entitled to qualified immunity — a legal protection that shields government officials from financial penalties unless they knowingly violated someone’s rights. He further contends that meeting minutes from the Inclusive Excellence Student Council were improperly admitted as evidence during trial and that the punitive damages against Webb were not supported by sufficient evidence of malicious intent. “There was simply no evidence presented at trial demonstrating Webb acted with an evil motive, malice or recklessness,” Pooser wrote.
Fendley’s attorney, Morgan D. Goodin, pushed back on each argument in an April 6 brief. Goodin argues that qualified immunity does not apply because the legal standard was well-established long before the events in question. “It has been settled for three decades that government officials may not cut ties with independent contractors in retaliation for disfavored speech,” Goodin wrote. He also maintained that Webb was not merely listening to students but actively responded to Fendley’s speech “with distaste from the get-go.”
Outside Legal Group Joins the Fight for Fendley
On April 13, the Pacific Legal Foundation — an Arlington, Virginia-based public interest law firm with a 50-year record of litigating against government entities — filed a “friend of the court” brief siding with Fendley. The foundation argued that Fendley did not surrender her First Amendment protections simply by operating a business on a state university campus.
“Universities should serve as beacons of free inquiry and open debate. … Instead, campuses are boiling with free speech controversies, and university leaders have too often sided with silence, not free discourse,” the foundation wrote. One of the brief’s authors is Megan Wold, an attorney and the wife of Theo Wold, a former Trump administration official and Idaho solicitor general.
Impact on Ada County Residents and Boise State’s Reputation
For Ada County taxpayers, the financial stakes are concrete: more than $5.2 million in jury-awarded damages and legal fees hangs in the balance, money that ultimately flows from Idaho’s public university system. Beyond the dollars, the case has become a focal point in a broader debate about ideological climate at Boise State — Idaho’s flagship university located in the heart of the Treasure Valley.
The case has drawn attention from Idahoans concerned about free speech on publicly funded campuses, and the Idaho Supreme Court’s eventual ruling could set important precedent for how state universities interact with contractors and vendors who hold politically disfavored views. Readers following other high-profile Idaho Supreme Court cases or Ada County court proceedings will want to monitor this case closely as it develops.
What Comes Next
As of publication, the Idaho Supreme Court has not scheduled a hearing date in the Boise State-Big City Coffee case. With opening briefs now filed by both sides, the court will likely allow additional briefing before setting oral arguments. Ada County residents and Boise State stakeholders can monitor the case through the Idaho Supreme Court’s public docket. Given the five-year history of the dispute and the complexity of the First Amendment and qualified immunity questions involved, a final ruling may still be months away.