Texas A&M's Drag Ban Shows the Threat to Campus Free Speech Is Bipartisan
Men have been dressing as women in theatrical performances for millennia—a history that includes ancient Greek dramas, 16th century productions of Shakespeare's plays, and popular films such as Hairspray, Tootsie, Mrs. Doubtfire, and White Chicks. But the continuation of that tradition was too much for the Texas A&M Board of Regents, which last month banned "drag shows that involve biological males dressing as women" from "special event venues."
That decree put the kibosh to Draggieland, an annual event sponsored by the Texas A&M Queer Empowerment Council. The organization had already reserved the Rudder Theatre at the university's College Station campus and sold tickets for the show, which was scheduled for March 27.
The theater previously had been available for a wide variety of events, including comedies, musicals, ballet, political speeches, and a fraternity-sponsored beauty pageant. Although the theater had never rejected a reservation request, the regents unanimously decided that Draggieland was beyond the pale because it was "likely to create or contribute to a hostile environment for women," thereby violating federal law and the university's "anti-discrimination policy."
The regents also cited President Donald Trump's January 20 executive order aimed at "defending women from gender ideology extremism and restoring biological truth to the federal government," which Texas Gov. Greg Abbott had welcomed in a January 30 letter instructing state officials that their policies must conform with "the biological reality that there are only two sexes." The regents worried that allowing drag shows "may be considered promotion of gender ideology in violation of the Executive Order and the Governor's directive."
These concerns were legally and logically frivolous. It was utterly implausible that an annual event attended only by paying patrons could result in harassment "severe" and "pervasive" enough to create a "hostile environment," and it was quite a stretch to suggest that cross-dressing in the context of a drag show denies the "biological reality" that Abbott is keen to uphold.
Even as the regents worried that Draggieland promoted "gender ideology," they argued that it did not actually send any message at all—a point that was crucial to their position that canceling the event did not implicate the First Amendment. And even as they explicitly targeted a particular viewpoint, they denied that they were doing any such thing.
U.S. District Judge Lee H. Rosenthal had little trouble seeing through the double-talk. In the decision that allowed Draggieland to proceed as planned, she noted that federal courts had almost uniformly recognized drag shows as a form of constitutionally protected expression.
Rosenthal, who was appointed by George H.W. Bush in 1992, is hardly a "Radical Left Lunatic"—the label that Trump reflexively applies to judges who disagree with him. Nor is U.S. District Judge David Hittner, a Ronald Reagan appointee who ruled that a Texas law "touted as a 'Drag Ban'" was unconstitutional in a 2023 decision that Rosenthal cited.
"In recent years, the commitment to free speech on campuses has been both challenging and challenged," Rosenthal noted. "There have been efforts from all sides of the political spectrum to disrupt or prevent students, faculty, and others from expressing opinions and speech that are deemed, or actually are, offensive or wrong."
The victims of those efforts have included conservatives who condemn abortion, promote "a Christian perspective," or chafe at speech restrictions in the guise of fighting "discriminatory harassment"—exactly the tactic that Texas A&M attempted in this case. Instead of picking up the unconstitutional weapons that have been deployed against them, conservatives who want to ensure their own protection should take a page from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which represented Draggieland's sponsor in this case, by embracing an even-handed application of free speech principles.
© Copyright 2025 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
The post Texas A&M's Drag Ban Shows the Threat to Campus Free Speech Is Bipartisan appeared first on Reason.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House defends firing of jobs official
White House economic advisers have on defended President Donald Trump's firing of the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, rejecting criticism it could undermine confidence in official US economic data. Trump had BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer sacked on Friday, despite no evidence of any wrongdoing, after a report showed hiring slowed in July and was much weaker in May and June than previously reported. Trump, in a post on his social media platform, alleged that the figures were "RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad". Trump again criticised McEntarfer on Sunday, saying he would name a new commissioner in the next three or four days. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CBS that Trump had "real concerns" about the BLS data, while Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, said the president "is right to call for new leadership". Hassett said on Fox News Sunday the main concern was Friday's BLS report of net downward revisions showing 258,000 fewer jobs had been created in May and June than previously reported. Trump accused McEntarfer of faking the jobs numbers, without providing any evidence of data manipulation. The BLS compiles the closely watched employment report as well as consumer and producer price data. The BLS gave no reason for the revised data but noted "monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors". McEntarfer's firing added to growing concerns about the quality of US economic data and came on the heels of a raft of new tariffs on dozens of trading partners, sending global stock markets tumbling as Trump presses ahead with plans to reorder the global economy. Critics, including former leaders of the BLS, slammed Trump's move and called on Congress to investigate McEntarfer's removal, saying it would shake trust in a respected agency. "It undermines credibility," said William Beach, a former BLS commissioner and co-chair of the group Friends of the BLS. "There is no way for a commissioner to rig the jobs numbers," he said on CNN's State of the Union. Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers also criticised McEntarfer's firing. "This is a preposterous charge. These numbers are put together by teams of literally hundreds of people following detailed procedures that are in manuals," Summers said on ABC's This Week. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
State lawmakers left en masse in a bid to block a GOP map that would tilt the playing field in Republicans' favor.
Dozens of Texas Democratic lawmakers skipped town on Sunday in an extraordinary maneuver seeking to prevent a redistricting attempt pushed by President Donald Trump. By heading out of state, the lawmakers effectively denied the Republican-led state House the quorum needed to conduct business, temporarily halting the effort to redraw congressional maps. A vote on the draft map—which could give five additional seats to the GOP in next year's midterms—had been scheduled for Monday as part of a special session that began on July 21.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit.
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's extensive tariffs have already started to generate a significant amount of money for the federal government, a new source of revenue for a heavily indebted nation that American policymakers may start to rely on. As part of his quest to reorder the global trading system, Trump has imposed steep tariffs on America's trading partners, with the bulk of those set to go into effect Thursday. Even before the latest tariffs kick in, revenue from taxes collected on imported goods has grown dramatically so far this year. Customs duties, along with some excise taxes, generated $152 billion through July, roughly double the $78 billion netted over the same time period last fiscal year, according to Treasury data. Indeed, Trump has routinely cited the tariff revenue as evidence that his trade approach, which has sown uncertainty and begun to increase prices for consumers, is a win for the United States. Members of his administration have argued that the money from the tariffs would help plug the hole created by the broad tax cuts Congress passed last month, which are expected to cost the government at least $3.4 trillion. 'The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!' Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. 'I think this is addictive,' said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are.' Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. 'Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways,' said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'But it's really a political question.' Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. 'Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place,' Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. 'That's a hefty chunk of change,' Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. 'The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'' Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. 'This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. 'And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025
