Glenna Goldis 
@unyieldingbicyc
Dec 23, 2024
16 tweets
ACLU recently explained how it wants schools to deal with students who "misgender" each other.
This is significant. ACLU built its rep on free speech but lately is America's #1 trans law firm.
Here's its amicus brief to the 6th Circuit in Parents Defending Ed v Olentangy 
2/
ACLU opposes blanket bans on misgendering, appropriately referencing precedent.
3/
ACLU instead wants misgendering to be judged on a case by case basis.
The speaker's intent matters, apparently. But this point is never developed.
4/
A fundamental question about government misgendering bans is whether they "compel speech" under the 1st Amendment.
ACLU addresses this point in a footnote: it's not compelled speech because students can avoid using pronouns entirely.
5/
IMO, it's burdensome to avoid pronouns because they come up constantly. There's a mental tax on the speaker and listener when the speaker is engaging a legalistic workaround in every sentence. Plus the speaker sounds odd.
Precedent cited here doesn't address those points.
6/
ACLU argues off-campus speech should be less regulated than in-school speech. Good. But it still wants schools to regulate "bullying" speech that occurs outside school.
When does misgendering constitute bullying? ACLU never says.
7/
In arguing for less regulation of off-campus speech, ACLU implicitly acknowledges that the option to misgender is important.
8/
THAT'S IT?
-My reaction to reaching the "Conclusion" on page 12.
ACLU says it's OK for public schools to ban misgendering that causes a hostile enviro or disruption, but gives zero examples of what that means. Doesn't even say whether the speech at issue in this case was OK.
9/
This vacuity reminds me of the Biden admin's Title IX rewrite, which pointedly refused to provide examples to guide schools.
badfacts.substack.com/p/defining-sex
From my April post:
10/
Punishing students for correctly sexing their classmates is bonkers in every situation.
Trans rights lawyers don't provide examples of bannable misgendering because they don't have any that Americans would like. Or that would pass 1A muster in court.
11/
US courts work by wrestling with the messy details of individual cases. So briefs are supposed to wrestle with facts. The ACLU's brief fails because it doesn't discuss the facts of this Ohio lawsuit.
It's poor quality wherever you stand on misgendering.
11/
The case is about a teacher fired for refusing to pretend students were the wrong sex. Her expert testified that preferred pronouns didn't help "trans" kids.
Was the school wrong to fire her? ACLU won't say.
I posted about the case before:
x.com/unyieldingbicy
Glenna Goldis @unyieldingbicyc
Aug 22 24
View on Twitter
A federal judge in Ohio ruled last week that pronoun policies are compelled speech. But they might still be legal ...
The case involves a middle school teacher, Geraghty, who opposes social transition on religious grounds.
12/
The Supreme Court will soon decide whether to hear LM v Middleborough, about whether schools can ban "there are only 2 genders."
If it hears the case, all eyes will be on the ACLU. Will it weigh in without analyzing the message?!
My post on LM:
badfacts.substack.com/p/banned-in-bo
13/
The 6th Cir brief is signed by members of the ACLU's "speech, privacy, and technology" practice.
Apparently protecting free speech isn't a standalone project for today's ACLU.
aclu.org/bio/ben-wizner
14/
Some states have gender ID laws that their civil rights agencies interpret to ban misgendering in the workplace, at school, etc.
The agencies don't sue to enforce their theories. I suspect they know they're violating free speech.
15/
I almost forgot to link the ACLU's big nothingburger amicus brief
acluohio.org/en/press-relea
Glenna Goldis
@unyieldingbicyc
Lawyer. Protect kids from gender doctors. Lesbian not queer. I'm the one on the right ⤴️
Missing some tweets in this thread? Or failed to load images or videos? You can try to .