Supreme Court declines to hear appeal from seventh grader who wore ‘two genders' shirt to school
Two conservative justices – Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas – dissented from the decision to not hear the case.
So long as the appeals court's decision is on the books, Alito wrote, 'thousands of students will attend school without the full panoply of First Amendment rights. That alone is worth this court's attention.'
Liam Morrison wore the shirt to Nichols Middle School in Middleborough, Massachusetts, in 2023 to 'share his view that gender and sex are identical.' School administrators asked him to remove it and, when he declined, sent him home for the day. Weeks later, he wore the same shirt but covered the words 'only two' with a piece of tape on which he wrote 'censored.'
Morrison and his family sued the district in federal court, asserting a violation of his First Amendment rights. The district court ruled against him and the Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision.
In a landmark 1969 decision, Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court affirmed students' First Amendment rights at school, but the court qualified those rights, allowing school administrators to regulate the speech if it 'materially disrupts' instruction at the school. The Vietnam-era case permitted a group of students to wear black armbands in protest of the war.
The appeals court held that schools can regulate a student's speech under Tinker if it 'assertedly demeans characteristics of personal identity' of other students if the message is 'reasonably forecasted' to poison the 'educational atmosphere.' Morrison, who is represented by the religious legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, argues that decision 'sidelined' Tinker and 'gave near-total deference to the school's determination of what speech demeans protected characteristics and substantially disrupts its operations.'
In their written response to the Supreme Court, school officials noted they are aware of transgender and gender-nonconforming students 'who had experienced serious mental health struggles, including suicidal ideation, related to their treatment by other students based on their gender identities' and that those struggles could impact the students' ability to learn.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas House finally passes congressional redistricting map after weeks of walkouts, lock-ins and arrest warrants
The new map could secure the GOP five additional seats in Congress in next year's midterms. Democrats say they now plan to challenge the map in court. The Texas House of Representatives approved a new map for the state's congressional districts on Wednesday, cementing a legislative win for Republicans that had been put on hold for weeks when Democratic legislators fled the state to block its passage. The new map would give the GOP a chance to secure up to five additional seats in Congress in next year's midterm elections. A final vote in the state Senate, which is expected to approve the plan, is needed before the it can be signed into law. Democrats say they intend to challenge the map in court. Republicans first announced their intention to pursue redistricting outside of the usual 10-year cycle in June. But the fight over the plan didn't become a national story until earlier this month, when dozens of Democrats left the state in order to prevent the House from having enough members present to formally meet. Each absent Democrat was fined $500 a day during the roughly two weeks they were out of state. Texas's Republican governor Greg Abbott also threatened to have them removed from their seats and civil warrants were issued for their arrests. In the end, though, the Democrats opted to return home in order to 'build a strong public legislative record for the upcoming legal battle' over the maps. They argue that the new district violates both the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. Their walkout, which was never likely to prevent the maps from passing entirely, inspired Democrats in blue states across the country to rally behind their cause, pleading to pursue their own redistricting plans to offset the GOP's gains in Texas. So far, only California has formally moved forward with that process. Democratic governor Gavin Newsom has called for a special election in November to ask voters to approve new district lines in the state. Texas Democrats returned to the House for the first time on Monday, which allowed the chamber to meet briefly before adjourning with a plan to meet again on Wednesday to consider the maps. At the end of Monday's session, the House's GOP leadership instituted a rule requiring all Democrats who had previously left the state to submit to police escort in order to be allowed to exit the Capitol. All but one, Rep. Nicole Collier of Fort Worth, consented. Collier chose instead to remain in the House chamber. She spent Tuesday night sleeping at her desk with her feet propped up on a rolling chair. Two of her colleagues, including House Minority Leader Gene Wu, joined her overnight protest Tuesday night. More Democrats did the same on Wednesday night. The House reconvened on Wednesday morning for a lengthy — and at times heated — debate over the redistricting plan. Democrats proposed a variety of amendments to the proposal, including one that would have only allowed the maps to go into effect if the federal government agreed to release all files related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. 'What we are doing today is unjust, it is un-Texan and it is un-American,' Democratic representative Cassandra Garcia Hernandez said before the bill's final passage. The bill was eventually passed in an 88—52 party-line vote. The issue now moves to the courts. The standards for what makes congressional maps legal or not can be complicated. The Supreme Court has ruled that gerrymandered maps drawn to give one party a political advantage are generally constitutional. However, district lines that deliberately weaken the voting power of a specific racial group are not. The fate of Texas's new map will hinge on whether the courts view it as a racial gerrymander, as Democrats claim, rather than a purely partisan one. Republicans are also looking at a number of other red states where they believe there may be opportunities to gain extra seats through redistricting, including Ohio, Missouri and Indiana. Democrats are doing the same in blue states outside of California, though their ability to put more favorable district lines in states like Illinois, Maryland and New York may be limited. Read more: Texas redistricting fight goes national as GOP, Dems prepare for more battles over future House maps The ultimate outcome of the redistricting battle, in Texas and nationwide, could play a major role in deciding which party has control of Congress after the 2026 midterms. Democrats only need to gain a small number of seats to get the majority in the House. If they do, they would effectively have veto power over any legislation Trump and the GOP want to pass. They would also have new oversight authority and the ability to launch investigations into the president's most controversial moves since he returned to office.
CBS News
22 minutes ago
- CBS News
Texas House passes GOP redistricting plan after weeks-long standoff
The Texas House of Representatives gave final passage on Wednesday to House Bill 4, a controversial Republican-backed proposal to redraw the state's congressional maps and potentially add up to five new GOP-leaning districts. Entering Wednesday, the bill needed to pass two votes in the House to advance to the Senate. Each vote passed 88-52. Before the final vote, lawmakers debated a series of amendments offered by Democrats, all of which were rejected by the Republican majority. The bill was the sole item on the agenda for the day's floor session, which began at 10 a.m. The Texas Senate, which approved a similar version of the redistricting legislation earlier this week, is scheduled to take up the House-passed bill when it convenes this Thursday at 7 p.m. If the Senate approves the House version without changes, the legislation could be sent to Gov. Greg Abbott by the end of the week. If not, the two chambers will need to reconcile differences in a conference committee. The vote came after a dramatic standoff earlier this month, when Democratic lawmakers fled the state to break quorum and block action on the redistricting bill. Their absence stalled the Legislature and effectively ended the first special session, delaying the measure for two weeks. Gov. Greg Abbott called a second special session hours after the first adjourned, and Democrats returned to the House chamber on Monday, allowing the legislation to move forward. That evening, HB 4 passed out of the House redistricting committee on a 12-8 party-line vote. To prevent another walkout, House Speaker Dustin Burrows imposed a rule requiring Democratic members to be escorted by Department of Public Safety officers if they wished to leave the Capitol. While most Democrats complied, Rep. Nicole Collier of Fort Worth refused. She was temporarily locked in the House chamber and was later allowed to go to her Capitol office. On Monday, Collier filed a petition in state court alleging she was under "illegal restraint by the government." The court has not yet ruled on the matter. On Tuesday, several other Democrats joined Collier in protest, tearing up their signed escort agreements and spending the night in the Capitol. With the passage of HB 4, Republican leaders dropped the escort requirement. The redistricting plan is expected to give Republicans a significant advantage in the 2026 midterm elections, potentially flipping up to five congressional seats.
Politico
25 minutes ago
- Politico
Appeals court panel clears way for Trump admin to end TPS for Hondurans, Nepalis and Nicaraguans
'The thing we had in the Supreme Court had nothing to do with these at all,' Arulanantham told the judges. Arulanantham, co-director of the UCLA Center for Immigration Law and Policy, decried the 9th Circuit ruling Wednesday, particularly the judges' lack of explanation for their conclusion. 'The court's failure to provide any reasoning for its decision, including why this was an 'emergency,' falls far short of what due process requires, and our clients deserve,' Arulanantham said. 'The decision simply sanctions the government's power grab, exposing tens of thousands of people to illegal detention and deportation. They deserve better than what this court has done today.' Spokespeople for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to requests for comment. TPS status for Nepalis was set to expire Aug. 5, so they could be required to leave the country immediately. Protections for Hondurans and Nicaraguans are now set to end Sept. 8, barring further court action. However, not all of the roughly 63,000 immigrants covered by the ruling Wednesday face the prospect of immediate deportation. Some have pending claims for asylum or withholding of deportation, which could allow them to remain in the U.S. In its emergency stay request, the Trump administration asked the panel to halt further action in the lawsuit pending in the district court and said the government planned to make a rare request to remove Thompson from the matter, citing her use of 'extreme rhetoric with no bearing on this case.' The 9th Circuit panel declined to put a hold on the proceedings before Thompson, saying such a move wasn't justified simply because DOJ might move to disqualify her in the future.
