On November 6, 2025, Defending Education (DE) won its long-running compelled speech case against an Ohio school district. The ruling by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit gives students the broadest protection of their First Amendment rights since the 1960s, and other families can now use it to challenge similar policies.
In 2023, DE sued Olentangy Local Schools in Ohio over its “harassment” policies and Codes of Conduct. These rules violated students’ First Amendment rights by forcing them to use classmates’ “preferred pronouns,” even if doing so went against their deeply held beliefs. Students who refused faced punishments ranging from “no-contact orders” to suspension or expulsion.
According to the district, “misgendering” is banned speech because students who identify as transgender are a protected class. The policy also says “harassment” can take many forms, including “gestures,” “language,” and “encouraging” harassment. The original policies also violated the Fourteenth Amendment by reaching students’ speech outside school. The district’s cell phone policy and Code of Conduct intruded on parents’ rights, since how students use their devices away from school to discuss gender issues is up to their families, not the government.
During the lawsuit, the district tried to make the case go away by slightly changing some of its policies. In September 2024, the school board removed speech that might “cause discomfort or humiliation” or amount to “teasing” from its definition of “bullying.” It also revised its cell phone policy to say it should “not be interpreted to infringe upon the First Amendment rights of students (i.e., to prohibit a reasoned and civil exchange of opinions, or debate, that is conducted at appropriate times and places during the school day and is protected by State or Federal law).” But as the full court noted, “these modest changes do not moot the threatened freedom-of-speech injury … To the contrary, the School District admits that it will continue to bar what it calls ‘misgendering’ if it determines that this speech ‘rises to the level of bullying or harassment.’”
Sixth Circuit precedent is clear. In 2021, in Meriwether v. Hartop, the court found that a “preferred pronoun” requirement was “anathema to the principles underlying the First Amendment” because “[p]ronouns can and do convey a powerful message implicating a sensitive topic of public concern.” In other words, pronouns have the “power to validate—or invalidate—someone’s perceived sex or gender identity.” Schools cannot force students to express one view (for example, that people can change genders) while banning the opposite view (for example, that sex cannot change).
Defending Education President and Founder, Nicole Neily, celebrated the victory:
“We are deeply gratified by the Sixth Circuit’s intensive analysis not only of our case but the state of student First Amendment rights in modern era. The court’s decision – and its many concurrences – articulate the importance of free speech, the limits and perils of public schools claiming to act in loco parentis, and the critical role of persuasion – rather than coercion – in America’s public square.”
Defending Education Vice President, Sarah Parshall Perry, added:
“Despite its ham-fisted attempt to moot the case, Olentangy School District was sternly reminded by the 6th circuit en banc court that it cannot force students to express a viewpoint on gender identity with which they disagree, nor extend its reach beyond the schoolhouse threshold into matters better suited to an exercise of parental authority. A resounding victory for student speech and parental rights was long overdue for families in the school district and we are thrilled the court’s ruling will benefit others seeking to vindicate their rights in the classroom and beyond.”
Read the full decision below:
