Court: Forcing Christian Teacher to Use Preferred Names and Pronouns is Compelled Speech

Vivian Geraghty was an English teacher at Jackson Memorial Middle School in Massillon, Ohio. Unfortunately, this school was not immune to the peer-pressured and dangerous social trend of “transitioning.”

According to Alliance Defending Freedom, Geraghty’s legal counsel, the school counselor told Geraghty and other teachers to participate in two students’ fantasies of pretending to be the opposite sex. They wanted everyone to use opposite-sex pronouns and call them by their preferred names. Geraghty, a Christian, refused, as any reasonable and concerned person would.

Geraghty went to the principal to opt out on religious grounds. School officials told her she had to “put her beliefs aside as a public servant,” and that refusing would be considered insubordination. They told her, essentially, that her constitutionally guaranteed religious liberty was subordinate to the “transgender” agenda. If she didn’t comply with compelled speech, she must resign. Geraghty resigned.

In an era when courts are finally protecting the religious freedom of individuals and businesses, the school district acted foolishly.

Geraghty filed a lawsuit against the school board on the grounds that she was forced to resign, and the “transgender” policy violated her free speech and free exercise under the First Amendment. She also alleged that the school district violated her Due Process rights and rights under the state’s constitution.

Both parties filed motions for summary judgments. The school board claimed that the compelled speech was merely a “non-ideological ministerial task” and part of Geraghty’s job duties.

Citing several cases, including 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (2023), the court contended that the speech at issue (preferred names and pronouns) was compelled speech, which the First Amendment bars.

The court said that this speech carries a message — a message that Geraghty did not want to convey. As an English teacher, her job was to teach English, not “to teach anything with regard to LGBTQ issues.” Additionally, the school district’s pronoun and preferred name policy was not neutral and generally applied.

Photo credit: Alan Alfaro (Creative Commons) – Some rights reserved

Check Also

Church Appeals After Maine Defies Supreme Court’s Decision on School Choice Funding for Religious Schools

The U.S. Supreme Court in Carson v. Makin (2022) ruled that a law in Maine that barred …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *