A man from Washington, D.C., has initiated a lawsuit, arguing that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was arrested for playing “Star Wars” music in front of federalized troops. This legal action is being pursued with the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The complaint, a comprehensive 17-page document, was filed on Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. It opens with a nod to the iconic score by John Williams, a centerpiece of one of the most beloved science fiction series ever created.

The lawsuit explains, “In the Star Wars franchise, ‘The Imperial March’ is the music that accompanies the entrance of Darth Vader or other nefarious characters, underscoring their villainous exploits.” The same music, it notes, served as the backdrop for Sam O’Hara’s protest against the National Guard’s deployment in D.C.

The melody is recognized as a theme, a non-diegetic form of audio, often used in films to signal certain narrative developments.

In August, then-President Donald Trump mobilized the National Guard from various states to bolster security in the nation’s capital. As stated in the lawsuit, O’Hara began his protest in response to the continued presence of these troops on the streets of Washington, D.C.

After a few weeks of such deployments, O’Hara began to protest the presence of such troops, according to the lawsuit.

The plaintiff was motivated by the “roughly 200-year-old tradition of civilian law enforcement” in the U.S. and “deeply concerned about the normalization of troops patrolling D.C. neighborhoods,” the filing says.

So, O’Hara turned to the authoritarian universe — or, perhaps, rather, galaxy — created by George Lucas in order to contextualize his dissent against the troops performing police duties, according to the lawsuit.

“[H]e began protesting the Guard members’ presence by walking several feet behind them when he saw them in the community,” the lawsuit reads. “Using his phone and sometimes a small speaker, he played The Imperial March as he walked, keeping the music at a volume that was audible but not blaring. Mr. O’Hara recorded the encounters and posted the videos on his TikTok account, where millions of people have viewed them.”

On Sept. 11, O’Hara was arrested, according to the original petition. On that day, “Ohio National Guard member Sgt. Devon Beck was not amused by this satire,” the lawsuit alleges.

That day, Beck was patrolling, in uniform, with several other National Guard troops, near the intersection of 14th Street and R Street Northwest, the lawsuit says. Then came the protest in question.

“Mr. O’Hara calmly walked behind the Guard members, began playing The Imperial March aloud on his phone, and started recording,” the filing goes on. “In less than two minutes, Sgt. Beck turned around and threatened to call D.C. police officers to ‘handle’ Mr. O’Hara if he persisted. Mr. O’Hara continued recording and playing the music. Sgt. Beck contacted the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).”

Soon, four members of the MPD arrived and “in essence, did what Sgt. Beck had threatened, putting Mr. O’Hara in handcuffs and preventing him from continuing his peaceful protest,” the lawsuit claims.

The complaint leans into the phraseology of the introductory text scroll used for exposition purposes in each iteration of the film series.

“The law might have tolerated government conduct of this sort a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away,” the lawsuit continues. “But in the here and now, the First Amendment bars government officials from shutting down peaceful protests, and the Fourth Amendment (along with the District’s prohibition on false arrest) bars groundless seizures.”

Next, the filing accuses Beck and the four named MPD officers — J.M. Campbell, Tiffany Brown, Edward Reyes-Benigno, and Alfonso Lopez Martinez — of violating such “constitutional mandates.”

Particular ire, however, is reserved for the MPD who “compounded these violations by needlessly prolonging the length of Mr. O’Hara’s seizure and using excessive force by placing handcuffs tightly around his wrists and failing to loosen them after he complained,” the lawsuit alleges.

The lawsuit explains how O’Hara sought to “join [the] discourse” surrounding the deployment of troops — and notes that D.C.’s own attorney general “sued to end” the deployments.

The plaintiff says he used his phone, and on one occasion a small speaker, to play “The Imperial March” at National Guard troops on three occasions without incident — even occasionally drawing smiles or laughs from the troops he protested.

“On each occasion, Mr. O’Hara did not speak with the Guard members he trailed,” the complaint reads. “He played the March at a volume loud enough for people in the vicinity to hear but not at a blaring level.”

The plaintiff also makes clear to say that he never interfered with any actual law enforcement activities, but, rather, limited his protest to occasions when troops were “walking on patrol.”

On the day in question, roughly two minutes into the protest, Beck allegedly told O’Hara: “Hey man, if you’re going to keep following us, we can contact Metro PD and they can come handle you if that’s what you want to do. Is that what you want to do?”

O’Hara, in response, claims to have said nothing — but continued to play the orchestral arrangement.

“That’s what you want to do?” Beck allegedly said as the song continued. “Okay.”

When the MPD arrived, one of the officers first suggested O’Hara was “harassing” the troops, and later amended the allegation to a suggestion O’Hara was “assaulting” the troops — which the plaintiff disputed, instead saying he was peacefully protesting, according to the lawsuit.

“Mr. O’Hara was correct,” the complaint goes on. “He was not harassing or assaulting the Guard members. He was, in fact, standing several feet away, recording them and playing the March. Nor had Mr. O’Hara assaulted or harassed the Guard members at any point during his interaction with them.”

The lawsuit announces an effort to “ensure accountability, secure compensation for his injuries, and vindicate core constitutional guarantees.”

O’Hara’s lawsuit claims two First Amendment violations and one Fourth Amendment violation — all three of which use §1983 civil rights liability theories — and two separate violations of Washington, D.C., law.