(Headline USA) A federal appeals court in Cincinnati heard arguments Wednesday in a legal dispute that pits a suburban Ohio school district’s policy on gender pronouns against the free speech rights of classmates who believe there are only two genders.
The lawsuit brought by Parents Defending Education, a national membership organization, against the Olentangy Local School District in 2023 has captured broad national attention, with a number of conservative policy groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Hindu rights organizations lining up against the policy and leading LGBT rights and schools groups lining up generally in defense of it.
Ohio’s solicitor general, Elliot Gaiser, participated in oral arguments on behalf of 22 U.S. states that have interests in the case.
A lower court rejected the group’s arguments that the policies violated students’ First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights, and a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati affirmed that decision in July.
The lawsuit takes issue with overlapping district policies that prohibit the use of gender-related language that other students might deem insulting, dehumanizing, unwanted or offensive and call for the use of peers’ “preferred pronouns.”
The district’s electronic devices policy — which applies both on and off school time — prohibits transmitting “disruptive” material or material that could be seen as harassing or disparaging other students based on their gender identity or sexual orientation, among other categories.
A separate antidiscrimination policy prohibits students from engaging in “discriminatory language” during times when they’re under the school’s authority. That is defined as “verbal or written comments, jokes, and slurs that are derogatory towards an individual or group based on one or more of the following characteristics: race, color, national origin, sex (including sexual orientation and transgender identity), disability, age, religion, ancestry, or genetic information.”
Parents Defending Education argues that the policies compel students and parents who belong to their group to “affirm an idea that gender is fluid” in contradiction of their religious beliefs.
“These students have views that the District disfavors,” the group wrote in a court filing. “Specifically, they believe that people are either male or female, that biological sex is immutable, and that sex does not change based on someone’s internal feelings.
Accordingly, they ‘d(o) not want to be forced to ‘affirm’ that a biologically female classmate is actually a male — or vice versa — or that a classmate is ‘nonbinary’ and neither male nor female.”
The group argues that the policies violate the First Amendment’s guarantees to free speech and similar protections contained in the 14th Amendment, particularly since students are subject to punishment for violating the policies. But it also notes that the district documented no disruptive activity before imposing the policy some 10 years ago.
“Common sense says that Olentangy’s policies aren’t helping students by compelling their peers to parrot words they don’t really believe,” PDE’s attorney Cam Norris told judges Wednesday. “They are harming them by teaching them that different world views should be silenced and banned, not understood and rebutted.”
Gaiser contended that the policies have taken a side in a political debate. “Schools cannot silence dissenters by labeling those dissenters bullies,” he said.
The court did not say when it would rule.
Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press
