Federal appeals court backs Defending Ed in Ohio compelled speech case

Defending Education achieved a legal victory on November 6, 2025, in its case against the Olentangy Local School District in Ohio. The federal appellate court's decision has been described as one of the most significant defenses of student First Amendment rights since the 1960s. This ruling may serve as precedent for others challenging similar policies.

The case began in 2023 when Defending Education filed a lawsuit against the school district over policies that required students to use "preferred pronouns" for their peers. According to Defending Education, these rules forced students to affirm gender identities even if it conflicted with their beliefs. Non-compliance could result in punishments such as "no-contact orders," suspension, or expulsion.

The district argued that "misgendering" was prohibited speech because transgender students are a protected class and stated that it could lead to formal discipline. The policy also defined harassment broadly, including gestures, language, and encouraging such behavior.

Defending Education also claimed the policies violated the Fourteenth Amendment by regulating student speech outside of school. They said that cell phone and conduct rules infringed on parental rights by controlling how students discussed gender issues off campus.

During litigation, the district revised some policies in September 2024. Changes included removing certain speech from its definition of bullying and clarifying that cell phone use rules would not violate First Amendment rights during reasonable debate at appropriate times and places. However, according to the en banc court opinion, “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.’”

The Sixth Circuit cited its previous ruling in Meriwether v. Hartop (2021), which found that requiring preferred pronouns went against First Amendment principles because pronouns can communicate powerful messages about public concerns like sex and gender identity.

Nicole Neily, President and Founder of Defending Education, commented:

“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.”

Sarah Parshall Perry, Vice President of Defending Education, said:

“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.”