Judge Extends Restraining Order Against James O'Keefe, Orders Firearm Surrender

Court action follows dispute tied to reporting involving former Project Veritas board member.

Apr. 1, 2026 at 8:50pm

A judge in Miami extended a temporary restraining order against James O'Keefe on Wednesday and directed him to surrender his firearms, with the order remaining in effect until a scheduled hearing on May 11. O'Keefe plans to pursue an emergency appeal challenging the ruling, arguing the order raises constitutional concerns and infringes on First and Second Amendment protections.

Why it matters

The case highlights ongoing legal battles between media figures and those they report on, with O'Keefe claiming the restraining order amounts to an unconstitutional 'prior restraint against a newsroom.' The dispute also underscores tensions around the role of informants and the use of recorded material in journalism.

The details

Following a court hearing, the judge maintained the restraining order and issued the firearm directive. O'Keefe said the order was served by the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office while he was livestreaming from his organization's headquarters in West Palm Beach. The dispute is connected to reporting involving Matthew Tyrmand, who sought the domestic violence-related injunction in Miami-Dade County.

  • The judge extended the temporary restraining order on Wednesday, April 1, 2026.
  • A hearing to revisit the order is scheduled for May 11, 2026.

The players

James O'Keefe

The founder of the conservative activist group Project Veritas, who is challenging the restraining order on constitutional grounds.

Matthew Tyrmand

A former Project Veritas board member who filed the complaint seeking the domestic violence-related injunction against O'Keefe.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The Judge extended the temporary restraining order until May 11th. There will be a ruling then. The court is now asking me to surrender my firearms… We are filing an emergency interlocutory appeal today.”

— James O'Keefe

“Prior restraint against a newsroom is unconstitutional.”

— James O'Keefe

What’s next

O'Keefe indicated that his legal team will also pursue additional motions, including an anti-SLAPP filing seeking legal fees, as the case moves forward through the courts.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between media figures and those they report on, with concerns around constitutional rights, the role of informants, and the use of recorded material in journalism all at play.