BUZZ
‘Cannot favor one side of a debate involving parental speech on an issue of prominent public concern’
The First Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled against the judge who sided with a school district in forbidding parents from wearing “XX” wristbands to protest males playing in female sports.
Over a year ago, U.S. District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe sided with New Hampshire’s Bow School District in asserting the wristbands were “demeaning,” “harassing,” and “intimidating” to a boy playing on an opponent’s girls’ soccer team.
McAuliffe said the parents had “acted within their First Amendment rights to protest,” but that school officials “acted within their legal authority to restrict” them as school sporting events are “limited public forums.”
The judge further claimed the wristbands could “reasonably be understood as directly assaulting those who identify as transgender women” (emphasis added).
But this past Wednesday the First Circuit said Bow School District officials “cannot favor one side of a debate involving parental speech on an issue of prominent public concern, and which, in those parents’ views, concerned the safety of their children.”
“The school’s legitimate interest in regulating certain kinds of speech on the playing field sidelines, however, is not demonstrated by the evidence in this record,” the First Circuit’s decision reads. “There is no evidence that appellants’ protest caused a material disruption.
There was no disruption until school officials chose to intervene, after which the referee suspended the game for approximately fifteen minutes and the school officials chose to impose restrictions on appellants’ speech and impose sanctions. The appellants did not stage any pregame demonstrations; did not march, shout, chant, or otherwise disrupt the game; and did not confront [the transgender athlete] or any other player. Instead, they waited until halftime before donning the “XX” wristbands in a passive, silent gesture of protest. There is also no evidence of harassment, given there is no evidence in the record that any player actually saw the wristbands.
According to NH Journal, the district’s attorney compared the parents’ speech to “poison”: “You know, poison is often determined by the dose. We’re talking about future events where we don’t have an understanding of how many people are going to be showing up with these wristbands.”
The Institute for Free Speech’s Del Kolde simply retorted “Your Honors, free speech is not poison.”
Kolde added “If school officials allow expression supporting one side of a political debate, they cannot ban silent, peaceful expression on the other side. Our clients simply stood up for their First Amendment rights.”
The First Circuit remanded the case back to Judge McAuliffe “for further proceedings” consistent with its opinion.
MORE: School calls cops on parents wearing ‘XX’ wristbands to protest male player on girls team
