The Onion's amicus brief, submitted at the suggestion of Novak's counsel and drafted in consultation with the publication's writers, emphasized the importance of parody in political discourse, while also making absurd claims such as that The Onion "enjoys a daily readership of 4.3 trillion"[2] and calling the federal judiciary "Latin dorks".

[7] Parma Police obtained Novak's information from Facebook[4] and arrested him on March 25, 2016, a few weeks after the page's brief existence.

[1] In October 2017, Novak brought a federal suit in the Northern District of Ohio against the City of Parma and two investigating officers[9] under 42 U.S.C.

It found that Novak's speech did not fall under the exception made in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach for "official policies of retaliation", and found that the exception made in Nieves (laws that are rarely enforced) could not be invoked because the Supreme Court's decision in Nieves postdated the arrest.

[6] Thapar, again writing for the panel, expressed the court's "doubts" about the decision to prosecute Novak, but agreed that the city and officers had qualified immunity.

"[7][15] Novak filed a petition for a writ of certiorari from the United States Supreme Court on September 26, 2022,[16][17] represented by attorneys from the Institute for Justice.

Rising from its humble beginnings as a print newspaper in 1756, The Onion now enjoys a daily readership of 4.3 trillion and has grown into the single most powerful and influential organization in human history.

[25] The brief argues against the proposition that parody must be labeled to avoid risking criminal consequences, often using humor to make that point.

For instance, to illustrate the statement "It Should Be Obvious That Parodists Cannot Be Prosecuted For Telling A Joke With A Straight Face", the brief promises "a paragraph of gripping legal analysis" before devolving into an assortment of random law Latin phrases, having previously asserted that "the federal judiciary is staffed entirely by total Latin dorks".

"[26] The Onion defends Novak's comments as obvious parody under the "reasonable reader" standard established by prior jurisprudence,[27] adding "True; not all humor is equally transcendent.

[29] The Babylon Bee, a conservative satirical publication, filed an amicus brief as well, beginning "Truth is stranger than fiction.

"[32] In a final round of briefing in January 2023, Novak's lawyers framed the case as an opportunity to either reconsider qualified immunity or better balance it with the right to free speech.

[35] Novak expressed concerns for future implications for "others who poke fun at the powerful", while an attorney for Parma praised the outcome.