logo
Supreme Court denies student's right to wear 'only two genders' T-shirt at school

Supreme Court denies student's right to wear 'only two genders' T-shirt at school

Yahoo27-05-2025
The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down a middle-school student's claim he had a free-speech right to wear a T-shirt stating there are "only two genders."
Over two dissents, the justices let stand a ruling that said a school may enforce a dress code to protect students from "hate speech" or bullying.
After three months of internal debate, the justices decided they would not take up another conservative, culture war challenge to progressive policies that protect LGBTQ+ youth.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. filed a 14-page dissent joined only by Justice Clarence Thomas. He said the case "presented an issue of great importance for our nation's youth: whether public schools may suppress student speech because it expresses a viewpoint the schools disfavor."
Liam Morrison, a 7th grader from Massachusetts, said he was responding to his school's promotion of Pride Month when students were encouraged to wear rainbow colors and posters urged them to "rise up to protect trans and gender non-confirming students."
Two years ago, he went to school wearing a black T-shirt that said "There are only two genders."
Read more: Supreme Court splits 4-4, blocking first religious charter school in Oklahoma
A teacher reported him to the principal who sent him home to change his shirt. A few weeks later, he returned with the word "censored" taped over the words "two genders" but was sent home again.
The T-shirt dispute asked the Supreme Court to decide whether school officials may limit the free expression of some students to protect others from messages they may see as offensive or hurtful.
In March, the court voted to hear a free-speech challenge to laws in California and 21 other states that forbid licensed counselors from using "conversion therapy" with minors.
That case, like the one on school T-shirts, arose from appeals by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal group. It has already won free-speech rulings that allowed a cake maker and a website designer to refuse to participate in same-sex weddings despite state laws that barred discrimination based on sexual orientation.
On April 22, the court sounded ready to rule for religious parents in Montgomery County, Md., who seek the right to have their young elementary children "opt out" of the classroom use of a new 'LGBTQ-inclusive' storybooks.
The T-shirt case came before the court shortly after President Trump's executive order declaring the U.S. government will "recognize two sexes, male and female," not "an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity."
While the Supreme Court has yet to rule on T-shirts and the 1st Amendment, lower courts have upheld limits imposed by schools.
In 2006, the 9th Circuit Court in a 2-1 decision upheld school officials at Poway High School in San Diego who barred a student from wearing a T-shirt that said "Homosexuality is shameful." The appeals court said students are free to speak on controversial matters, but they are not free to make "derogatory and injurious remarks directed at students' minority status such as race, religion and sexual orientation.'
Other courts have ruled schools may prohibit a student from wearing a Confederate flag on a T-shirt.
In the new case from Massachusetts, the boy's father said his son's T-shirt message was not "directed at any particular person" but dealt with a "hot political topic."
In their defense, school officials pointed to their policy against "bullying" and a dress code that says "clothing must not state, imply, or depict hate speech or imagery that target groups based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religious affiliation, or any other classification."
Lawyers for the ADF sued on the student's behalf and argued the school violated his rights under the 1st Amendment. They lost before a federal judge in Boston who ruled for school officials and said the T-shirt "invaded the rights of the other students..to a safe and secure educational environment."
The 1st Circuit Court agreed as well, noting that schools may limit free expression of students if they fear a particular message will cause a disruption or "poison the atmosphere" at school.
Read more: Supreme Court will hear free-speech challenge to 'conversion therapy' bans in California, Colorado
The Supreme Court's most famous ruling on student rights arose during the Vietnam War. In 1969, the Warren Court ruled for high school students who wore black arm bands as a protest.
In Tinker vs. Des Moines, the court said students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate....For school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, [they] must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint."
The justices said then a symbolic protest should be permitted so long as it did not cause a "substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities."
The attorneys for Liam Morrison contended he should win under that standard.
"This case isn't about T-shirts. It's about public school telling a middle-schooler that he isn't allowed to express a view that it differs from their own," said David Cortman, an ADF attorney in the case of L.M vs. Town of Middleborough.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Largest teachers union slams ‘unlawful' cuts to Department of Education after supreme court ruling
Largest teachers union slams ‘unlawful' cuts to Department of Education after supreme court ruling

New York Post

time9 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Largest teachers union slams ‘unlawful' cuts to Department of Education after supreme court ruling

The president of the nation's largest teachers' union, the National Education Association, slammed the Supreme Court's ruling on Monday for siding with the Trump administration on dismantling the Department of Education. 'Everyone who cares about America's students and public schools should be appalled by the Supreme Court's premature intervention in this case today, which stays preliminary relief ordered by the lower courts. Today's decision does not resolve the underlying merits of Trump's unlawful plan to eliminate the Department of Education,' Becky Pringle said in a statement. Advertisement She added, 'Parents, educators, and community leaders won't be silent as Trump and his allies take a wrecking ball to public schools and the futures of the 50 million students in rural, suburban, and urban communities across America. We will continue to organize, advocate, and mobilize until all students have the opportunity to attend the well-resourced public schools where they can thrive.' 5 Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, speaks during an immigrant rights protest outside of the Department of Justice headquarters. Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images 5 The president of the nation's largest teachers' union, the National Education Association, slammed the Supreme Court's ruling on Monday. 5 Protestors holding signs in front of the U.S. Department of Education building. Advertisement The Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to fire hundreds of Department of Education employees, a move that advances President Donald Trump's plans to dismantle the department. The high court's decision in McMahon v. State of New York was issued 6-3 along ideological lines. The decision temporarily pauses an order by a lower court judge that had reinstated roughly 1,400 employees at the Department of Education. In March, Education Secretary Linda McMahon laid off half of the department's workforce as part of the Trump administration's broader reduction in government efforts. Later that month, Trump announced in an executive order that he planned to shutter the department altogether. 5 The Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to fire hundreds of Department of Education employees. Advertisement 5 The decision temporarily pauses an order by a lower court judge that had reinstated roughly 1,400 employees at the Department of Education. The Supreme Court's order arose from two lawsuits, including one brought by 20 Democratic-led states that challenged the Education Department's layoffs and planned closure. McMahon praised the ruling, vowing that the federal agency can now 'carry out the reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability and to return education back to the states.' Advertisement 'Today, the Supreme Court again confirmed the obvious: the President of the United States, as the head of the Executive Branch, has the ultimate authority to make decisions about staffing levels, administrative organization, and day-to-day operations of federal agencies,' McMahon said on X. 'While today's ruling is a significant win for students and families, it is a shame that the highest court in the land had to step in to allow President Trump to advance the reforms Americans elected him to deliver using the authorities granted to him by the U.S. Constitution.'

'A seismic change': Trump wants LGBTQ+ material axed from sex ed
'A seismic change': Trump wants LGBTQ+ material axed from sex ed

USA Today

time15 minutes ago

  • USA Today

'A seismic change': Trump wants LGBTQ+ material axed from sex ed

The federal Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program serves more than 300,000 youth. The Trump administration is telling organizations working to prevent teen pregnancy that they must stop teaching content that doesn't align with the administration's views on transgender people and parental rights or they'll risk losing their federal funding. Seventy-three organizations – including local health departments, community groups and universities – receive a portion of the $101 million budget for the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program each year. The groups serve more than 300,000 youth, mostly in school settings. "This is a seismic change," said Adrian Shanker, the former deputy assistant secretary for health policy under President Joe Biden. "This is a program that has been effective at keeping teens across the country from getting pregnant, so this should be a universally appreciated goal." The Department of Health and Human Services policy, announced in a July 1 memo to grantees, bans grant-funded programs from teaching about sex that is not heterosexual vaginal intercourse. It also bans 'the eroticization of birth control methods' and bans any content on creating more pleasurable sexual experiences. The policy goes on to prohibit any discussion of youth experiencing gender dysphoria or expressing transgender identities. "The statute does not require, support, or authorize teaching minors about (ideological) content, including the radical ideological claim that boys can identify as girls and vice versa," the memo to grant recipients says. "Programs must be aimed at reducing teen pregnancy, not instructing in such ideological content." Public health experts say the move could further stigmatize LGBTQ+ youth, who have higher rates of teen pregnancy than their heterosexual peers, and often feel less comfortable speaking to parents or health care providers about sex. Emily Hilliard, the press secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement that the new policy 'ensures that taxpayer dollars no longer support content that undermines parental rights, promotes radical gender ideology, or exposes children to sexually explicit material under the banner of public health.' Corina T. Lelutiu-Weinberger, an associate professor of health sciences research at Columbia University in New York, said teen pregnancy rates are already disproportionately high among bisexual girls, so making it harder to talk about their sexual behavior puts them at higher risk. A 2018 study published by the American Academy of Pediatrics found that bisexual girls had 'nearly five times the risk of teen pregnancy, and those who identified as mostly heterosexual or lesbian had about twice the risk compared to teens who were completely heterosexual.' Most of the disparity was explained by physical, emotional or sexual abuse. Lelutiu-Weinberger said youth tend to figure out their sexuality alone because they don't want to talk about it with their parents. She said LGBTQ+ people also tend to have a harder time talking about sex with health care providers, who often are not comfortable about talking about sex, or may have their own biases. 'There is a lot of discomfort and mislabeling and often there are no conversations,' Lelutiu-Weinberger said. 'And both parties are uncomfortable bringing it up because of fear of stigma.' Amelia Stanton, a Boston University professor and investigator for the Sexual, Reproductive and Mental Health Disparities Program, said the changes don't align with science or promote the best interest of public health. 'If we're limiting that information, we're not offering tools for planning,' Stanton said. 'We're not offering the opportunity to really learn how to prevent STIs or how to have agency in sexual activity.' Stanton said heterosexual intercourse might align more with traditional values, but failing to teach kids about oral sex, anal sex and other sexual behavior that carries risk for sexually transmitted infections will cause the rates of those infections to increase. Nearly half the nation's cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis in 2023 were reported in people 15 to 24, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Infections were disproportionately high among men who had sex with men. Shanker, the former Biden aide, said that Congress created the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program in 2010 under President Barack Obama to replace an abstinence-only sex education model in place under President George W. Bush. 'We have a comprehensive program that's highly effective, and they're tinkering with it for political purposes instead of trying to achieve public health results for the American people,' Shanker said.

Trump's Education Department layoffs got a green light. What now?
Trump's Education Department layoffs got a green light. What now?

USA Today

time23 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump's Education Department layoffs got a green light. What now?

The Supreme Court said the downsizing could proceed, at least for now. What does that mean for students, parents and teachers? WASHINGTON – Keeping tabs on President Donald Trump's campaign to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education hasn't been easy for students, parents and teachers. The effort has been multifaceted and drawn out. And it still isn't exactly close to over. Another big development came on June 14, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration could move forward with laying off more than 1,300 Education Department workers. The staffers – whose responsibilities included helping protect students and teachers from discrimination, assisting college financial aid offices and compiling data about the nation's schools – were laid off in March. The Supreme Court's green light came with caveats, though: The justices didn't rule on the merits of the case. They only allowed the agency to carry out the layoffs while a legal challenge proceeds. Education Dept. layoffs by the numbers: See which staff were ousted, where cuts hit hardest To be clear, there isn't much changing in the wake of this week's Supreme Court decision. All the workers who were let go in March have been locked out of their jobs since then. The difference now is that their terminations are official (unless a judge subsequently rules otherwise). And despite all the big talk from the White House, the Education Department isn't going away: Education Secretary Linda McMahon has made it clear that she knows her agency can't be fully eliminated without the help of Congress, and the coordinated effort required (including help from Democrats) isn't likely. Read more: What does the Education Department do? Trump gets the OK to gut it For many onlookers, the twists and turns in the Education Department saga have been unpredictable. The news has been confusing. And the rhetoric, coming from people on both sides of the issue, has left some scared. Here's how it all might impact you: Your child's school Public K-12 schools are primarily overseen at the local level by school boards. But they receive about a tenth of their funding from the federal government. And that funding has strings attached, which is where the Education Department comes in. The agency's layoffs have three main areas of potential impact for K-12 schools. First, there may continue to be disruptions in federal funding, which could cause other problems for school administrators trying to balance their budgets. For example, funding estimates for low-income schools that rely on Title I grants were a month late this year. That kind of uncertainty can trigger cost-cutting measures, such as hiring freezes, for districts. In addition, there will continue to be fewer federal workers on hand to address reports of discrimination affecting students and teachers. The Trump administration has dismissed hundreds of attorneys at the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights and closed more than half a dozen regional offices. Lastly, federal data that school administrators and teachers rely on remains in jeopardy. The National Center for Education Statistics, which oversees some of the most important educational progress assessments in the country, was reduced to just a handful of people in March. Without that data, teachers could have a harder time ensuring their students' learning is on track. Your financial aid Since the Education Department layoffs were announced, universities across the country have reported widespread problems in administering financial aid. That's because the division that lost the most employees was the Federal Student Aid office, which offers students help paying for college. Read more: Colleges report widespread problems with financial aid since Education Department layoffs A survey of roughly 900 colleges published on May 21 revealed new bottlenecks in the federal financial aid system. Missed emails, long call wait times and broader disruptions have made it harder for universities to help students access financial assistance, the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators found. Your student loans Student loan borrowers will continue to have fewer supports because of the layoffs. Education Department staffers responsible for holding student loan servicers accountable won't return to work. Nor will other workers who helped borrowers with the most complicated lending issues. Despite the lack of staffing, the Education Department's workload just grew. After President Trump signed his massive tax and spending bill into law, the agency was tasked with implementing two new loan repayment programs, as well as a complex system for holding colleges accountable. Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store