(LifeSiteNews) — Students cannot be forced to use the “preferred” pronouns of their gender-confused classmates, a federal court ruled recently.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Olentangy School District in Ohio and in favor of the religious and free speech rights of students.
The case attracted national interest from conservative legal groups.
“An Ohio public school district bars its students from referring to transgender and nonbinary classmates using the pronouns that match their biological sex if the classmates prefer to go by different pronouns,” Judge Eric Murphy, a Trump appointee, wrote for the majority opinion.
“The plaintiff in this case has parent and student members who believe that a person’s sex is immutable,” Murphy wrote in a decision published on November 6. “The members want to express this view by using biological pronouns. And they believe that they would convey a falsehood – that a person’s gender is fluid – if they use preferred pronouns.”
The school district argued that it needed to force all students to call their classmates by whatever pronouns they chose, otherwise that would “disrupt” the functioning of the school.
Judge Murphy dismissed this argument and castigated the school district for taking “a side” in the debate about gender ideology.
“The School District has ‘targeted’ a speaker’s use of biological pronouns as improper while allowing students to use preferred pronouns (no matter how novel),” Murphy wrote.
The district engages in “viewpoint discrimination,” which violates the First Amendment, according to the majority opinion.
“The School District permits certain approved messages on this topic – that individuals can have genders that
differ from their sex or at least that our society should refer to individuals using preferred pronouns to be courteous,” the opinion notes. “And the School District prohibits a disfavored view on the topic – that individuals can have only one gender determined at birth and that it is perfectly appropriate to refer to others using biological pronouns.”
The decision follows a previous Sixth Circuit ruling on behalf of an Ohio public university professor, Nicholas Meriwether, who refused to use a student’s “preferred” pronouns.
Legal groups praise ruling
Legal advocacy groups praised the ruling as a victory for free speech.
“We are deeply gratified by the Sixth Circuit’s intensive analysis not only of our case but the state of student First Amendment rights in modern era,” Defending Education President Nicole Neily said, according to a media statement sent to LifeSiteNews. “The court’s decision – and its many concurrences – articulate the importance of free speech, the limits and perils of public schools claiming to act in loco parentis, and the critical role of persuasion – rather than coercion – in America’s public square.”
The group’s legal fellow provided similar comments.
“Despite its ham fisted attempt to moot the case, Olentangy School District was sternly reminded by the 6th circuit en banc court that it cannot force students to express a viewpoint on gender identity with which they disagree, nor extend its reach beyond the schoolhouse threshold into matters better suited to an exercise of parental authority,” Sarah Parshall Perry stated. “A resounding victory for student speech and parental rights was long overdue for families in the school district and we are thrilled the court’s ruling will benefit others seeking to vindicate their rights in the classroom and beyond.”
“We’re pleased the court upheld the fundamental constitutional right of students to speak according to their deeply held beliefs,” Alliance Defending Freedom attorney John Bursch stated in a separate news release.
Well-respected legal scholar Jonathan Turley also concluded the court made the right decision.
He noted that judges appointed by Republicans ruled in favor of free speech, while Democratic appointees voted to let the school district sanction students for not using the new pronouns.
Turley, a professor at George Washington University’s law school, called it a “major ruling.”
He said the district could appeal to the Supreme Court, but there is a good chance the justices would uphold the ruling and thus establish a national standard.
“The question is whether the district wants to risk doubling down on a losing hand if the Supreme Court affirms the judgment,” Turley wrote. “Some advocates may be leery of rolling the dice on a further appeal given the implications of an adverse decision on pronouns that applies nationwide.”
This summer, the Supreme Court ruled that minors do not have a right to permanently damaging transgender drugs and surgeries. The court is set to hear a case this term concerning whether gender-confused males have a right to participate on girls’ sports teams.
