Law & Courts

A District’s Rule Against Misgendering Students Is Likely Constitutional

By Mark Walsh — July 30, 2024 4 min read
Demonstrators advocating for transgender rights and healthcare stand outside of the Ohio Statehouse, Jan. 24, 2024, in Columbus, Ohio. A federal appeals court on Wednesday, July 17, refused to lift a judge's order temporarily blocking the Biden administration’s new Title IX rule meant to expand protections for LGBTQ+ students
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A divided federal appeals court refused to block an Ohio school district’s rules that bar students from using pronouns that misgender their classmates. The policy, the court said, likely does not violate the First Amendment rights of students with religious beliefs that there is no such thing as a gender transition.

“Transgender students experience the use of non-preferred pronouns as dehumanizing and … as a result, the repeated use of such pronouns can have severely negative effects on children and young adults,” said the majority opinion on July 29 by a 2-1 panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in Cincinnati.

The court said the intentional use of preferred or nonpreferred pronouns is speech under the First Amendment, but the policies of the 24,000-student Olentangy school district were likely justified by the need to eliminate disruption and protect transgender students. The court rejected an injunction to block the rules sought by the national group Parents Defending Education on behalf of several district parents who argued that their children should not be required to use pronouns that conflict with their beliefs that there are only two biological-based genders.

“Perhaps the single thing on which the parties agree is that pronouns matter,” said the majority opinion by Judge Jane B. Stranch, an appointee of President Barack Obama. “That is true for transgender students in the district, who experience the use of preferred pronouns as a vital part of affirming their existence and experience the use of non-preferred pronouns as dehumanizing, degrading, and humiliating. It is also true for [the plaintiff] children, whose parents aver that using pronouns inconsistent with a person’s biological sex at birth contradicts their ‘deeply held beliefs’ about the immutability of sex.”

The opinion was joined by Judge Stephanie D. Davis, an appointee of President Joe Biden.

A school district’s rules are interpreted to bar misgendering, but it offers some alternatives

In 2023, the Olentangy district north of Columbus revised several of its policies to add protections against gender-identity discrimination. When a parent asked in an email whether their “devoutly Christian child who believes in two biological genders” would “be forced to use the pronouns that a transgender child identifies with or be subject to reprimand from the district,” a district lawyer responded that a student “purposefully referring to another student by using gendered language they know is contrary to the other student’s identity” would be discrimination under the district’s policies.

Parents Defending Education, which is involved in several similar cases across the country, sued on behalf of several parents in the district, arguing that the policies violated the First Amendment’s free-speech clause by impermissibly compelling speech, regulating speech based on viewpoint and content, and imposing overbroad restrictions on speech.

A federal district court last year denied a preliminary injunction to block the district’s policies. In its July 29 decision in Parents Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District, the 6th Circuit affirmed the lower court.

“Even this limited preliminary injunction record contains evidence of the substantial disruption that repeated, intentional use of non-preferred pronouns to refer to transgender students can cause,” Stranch wrote for the majority.

The court rejected the compelled-speech argument by the plaintiffs, noting that the school district has said no student would be compelled to use pronouns aligning with a transgender student’s gender identity. Instead, the student could use the classmate’s first name or avoid using pronouns altogether, the district said.

The appeals court rejected the viewpoint-discrimination argument because the district’s policies prohibit harassment, misconduct, and other disruptive speech across a variety of categories and it allows students to express the viewpoint that sex is immutable by several means other than “the use of non-preferred pronouns.” For example, the district said in court proceedings that it would allow a student to wear a T-shirt with the message, “Gender is not fluid,” the court said.

Judge Alice M. Batchelder, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, dissented, saying “The First Amendment forbids the district from compelling students to use speech that conveys a message with which they disagree, namely that biology does not determine gender.”

The district’s suggestion that objecting students use no pronouns was “awkward” and “requires the speaker to recognize and accept that gender transition is a real thing.”

“Regardless of whether students can also discuss gender ideology in the abstract—which is also protected speech—the students’ protected speech here is their use of biological pronouns to affirm their own belief that people are either male or female and that a child cannot ‘transition’ from one sex to another,” Batchelder said.

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Harnessing AI to Address Chronic Absenteeism in Schools
Learn how AI can help your district improve student attendance and boost academic outcomes.
Content provided by Panorama Education
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Science Webinar
Spark Minds, Reignite Students & Teachers: STEM’s Role in Supporting Presence and Engagement
Is your district struggling with chronic absenteeism? Discover how STEM can reignite students' and teachers' passion for learning.
Content provided by Project Lead The Way
Recruitment & Retention Webinar EdRecruiter 2025 Survey Results: The Outlook for Recruitment and Retention
See exclusive findings from EdWeek’s nationwide survey of K-12 job seekers and district HR professionals on recruitment, retention, and job satisfaction. 

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Supreme Court Won't Take Up Case on District's Gender Transition Policy
The U.S. Supreme Court declined an appeal from a parents' group contending that a district's policy on gender support plans excludes them.
4 min read
The Supreme Court is pictured, June 30, 2024, in Washington.
The Supreme Court is pictured, June 30, 2024, in Washington. The court on Monday declined to hear a case about a school district’s policy to support students undergoing gender transitions.
Susan Walsh/AP
Law & Courts High Court Won't Review School Admissions Policy That Sought to Boost Diversity
The U.S. Supreme Court refused a case about whether race was unconstitutionally considered in admissions to Boston's selective schools.
5 min read
The Supreme Court is pictured, Oct. 7, 2024, in Washington.
The Supreme Court is pictured, Oct. 7, 2024, in Washington. The court on Monday declined to take up a case about the Boston district’s facially race-neutral admissions policy for selective magnet high schools.
Mariam Zuhaib/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Case on Medical Care for Trans Youth Could Impact School Sports
The justices weigh a Tennessee law that bars certain medical treatments for transgender minors, with school issues bubbling around the case.
8 min read
Transgenders rights supporters rally outside of the Supreme Court, Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2024, in Washington.
Transgender rights supporters rally outside of the U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 4 as the court weighed a Tennessee law that restricts certain medical treatments for transgender minors.
Jose Luis Magana/AP
Law & Courts How a Supreme Court Case on Vaping Stands to Impact Schools
The U.S. Supreme Court heard an important case about federal regulation of flavored e-cigarettes, which remain a concern for schools.
6 min read
A high school principal displays vaping devices that were confiscated from students in such places as restrooms or hallways at a school in Massachusetts on April 10, 2018.
A high school principal in Massachusetts displays vaping devices that were confiscated from students in restrooms or hallways on April 10, 2018.
Steven Senne/AP