Re: Defying 200+ Years of 1A Precedent, Federal Judge Rules XX Armbands Can be Banned

On 4/16/2025 3:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

On Apr 16, 2025 at 12:11:15 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
 

On 4/16/2025 12:39 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

  >
https://nhjournal.com/judge-rules-school-can-ban-xx-protests-over-males-in-girls-sports/
    The Bow School District was acting within its authority to kick two soccer
  dads out of a girls game for wearing pink XX wristbands as a silent protest
  against biological males playing on girls' teams, a federal judge ruled
  Monday.
    But one of the dads, Anthony Foote, told NHJournal he plans to keep fighting
  for what he sees as the rights of women and girls.
    "What was our offense? Supporting girls' sports and defending biological
  reality?" Foote said. "This ruling is a slap in the face to every parent who
  believes schools should be a place of fairness, not political
indoctrination.
  The judge openly admitted that Pride flags are allowed because they promote
  'inclusion', but wristbands defending women's sports are banned because they
  might 'offend' someone. That's viewpoint discrimination, plain and simple
and
  it's unconstitutional."
    United States District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe ruled against Foote,
Kyle
  Fellers, Eldon Rash, and Nicole Foote in a 45-page order denying their
  preliminary injunction against SAU 67. The parents are being represented by
  the Institute for Free Speech, a legal nonprofit that promotes parents'
  rights. Del Kolde, the senior attorney, said he is still considering his
next
  steps in this case.
    "We strongly disagree with the court's opinion issued today denying our
  request for a preliminary injunction. This was adult speech in a limited
  public forum, which enjoys greater 1st Amendment protection than student
  speech in the classroom. Bow School District officials were obviously
  discriminating based on viewpoint because they perceived the XX wristbands
to
  be 'trans-exclusionary''. We are still evaluating our options for next
steps,"
  Kolde said.
    The crux of McAuliffe's ruling is that while Fellers, Foote, and the others
  acted within their 1st Amendment rights to protest, venues like school
  athletic events are considered "limited public forums" and school officials
  acted within their legal authority to restrict what the parents said and
did.
    "The question then becomes whether the School District can manage its
athletic
  events and its athletic fields and facilities  that is, its limited public
  forum  in a manner that protects its students from adult speech that can
  reasonably be seen to target a specific student participating in the event
(as
  well as other similar gender-identifying students) by invited adult
  spectators, when that speech demeans, harasses, intimidates, and bullies.
The
  answer is straightforward: Of course it can. Indeed, school authorities are
  obligated to do so," McAuliffe wrote.
    For days before the Sept. 10, 2024, game, Anthony Foote and Fellers made it
  known to school officials that they were unhappy Bow High School was going
to
  play a game against a girls' team with a biological male player, Parker
  Tirrell.
    Days before the game, Tirrell made national news with a court victory
against
  the state of New Hampshire's law barring biological males from girls'
sports.
    The dads went on social media to discuss various protest ideas, according to
  the evidence in the case. McAuliffe wrote that it is reasonable, given the
  context of the game, for SAU 67 administrators to be concerned that the
  potential protests would be interpreted by Tirrell as bullying and
harassing.
    And as such, the judge ruled, the school had the right to limit the dads'
  speech.
    "The message generally ascribed to the XX symbol, in a context such as that
  presented here, can reasonably be understood as directly assaulting those
who
  identify as transgender women," McAuliffe wrote. "Because gender identities
  are characteristics of personal identity that are 'unalterable or otherwise
  deeply rooted', the demeaning of which 'strikes a person at the core of his
  being', and because Bow school authorities reasonably interpreted the
symbols
  used by plaintiffs, in context, as conveying a demeaning and harassing
  message, they properly interceded to protect students from injuries likely
to
  be suffered."
    Fellers and Foote have maintained they were not targeting or harassing any
  particular student with their wristbands. McAuliffe ruled that, even
accepting
  their stated intent not to harass Tirrell, the broader context for the game
  made the SAU's actions reasonable and justified.
    "While plaintiffs may very well have never intended to communicate a
demeaning
  or harassing message directed at Parker Tirrell or any other transgender
  students, the symbols and posters they displayed were fully capable of
  conveying such a message and that broader messaging is what the school
  authorities reasonably understood and appropriately tried to prevent,"
  McAuliffe said.
    Critics of the judge's ruling say that it is clearly viewpoint
discrimination
  and the judge's view that "gender identity" is "inalterable" isn't based on
  biological fact or in law.
    McAuliffe has yet to rule on the permanent injunction. Fellers, Foote, and
the
  other parents are seeking to allow them to protest at school games and other
  events.

>
I wonder if, say, Swastika hats should be permitted on the sidelines.

 Yes, and let them suffer the slings and arrows that come their way for wearing
them.

While I agree with that burden aspect, it'd be nice to keep kids' games free of *all* such identity noise (including, e.g., "pride" flags).