It has become ever more apparent over recent years that the authoritarian left despises free speech. But their hatred for the notion that the government should not stop people from expressing their views is rarely on display so brazenly as it is when people oppose gender ideology.
Luckily, there are an increasing number of people fighting back against efforts to silence their voices.
Four New Hampshire residents are suing school officials from Bow High School and the Bow School District for threatening to have them arrested for engaging in a silent protest of biological males competing in girls sports.
Background: Concerned NH Parent Banned From School Grounds for Protesting Boy on Girls Sports Team
The problem started on September 17 when the plaintiffs, including three parents and one grandparent, wore pink wristbands with the letters “XX” at a high school girls soccer game in a silent protest against the district’s decision to allow biological males to compete.
The lawsuit alleges that school officials, with the help of law enforcement, threatened them with arrest and possible forfeiture of the game. The officials also issued “No Trespass” orders, banning them from school property, according to the complaint.
The plaintiffs argue that the school district’s actions violate their First Amendment rights by using intimidation to stifle their voices.
The school’s athletic director, principal, and police claimed the protest was disruptive and a violation of school policies. They allegedly compelled the individuals to take off the wristbands under threat of removal or arrest.
When some parents resisted, the school escalated the situation, which caused a delay in the game, according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs allege that Bow School District applied its speech and conduct policies in a discriminatory manner to stifle dissenting views. They point out that other forms of political and social perspectives are allowed at school events. Yet, officials singled them out for opposing gender ideology.
“Bow School District’s ban on demonstrations criticizing the decision to allow biological boys to play girls soccer—cloaked in the language of ‘disruption’ and ‘harassment’—is unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination,” the lawsuit reads.
The school district “deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of the right to free speech, assembly, and petition in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments,” the complaint alleges.
The plaintiffs further claim school officials and law enforcement conspired together to stifle their silent protest. “Both before and during Plaintiffs’ September 17 silent demonstration, Defendants consulted with each other and agreed to take overt acts together to prevent Plaintiffs’ demonstration by threatening to arrest Plaintiffs,” the complaint explains.
Steve Rossetti, the referee at the soccer match, allegedly “used his authority as referee to threaten to abandon the game, which would have caused the Bow team to forfeit their playoff spot, unless Defendants removed their wristbands,” according to the complaint.
The school has continued to infringe on the parents’ rights “by enforcing No Trespass Orders against them and threatening to extend or renew such Orders if Plaintiffs protest again,” the document reads.
The plaintiffs are challenging how the district’s policies are applied. They accuse officials of using requirements for “mutual respect, civility, and orderly conduct” and prohibitions against “harassment” and “disrupting school activities” to restrict their right to voice their views.
“Defendants have relied on four policies to prevent Plaintiffs from expressing their views on school property... These four policies, both together and separately, unconstitutionally discriminate based on viewpoint,” the lawsuit alleges.
“Over fifty years ago, in the Tinker case, the Supreme Court held that all Americans have the right to silently protest the Vietnam War by wearing a black armband to school,” said Del Kolde, senior attorney for the Institute for Free Speech. “Today, the political debate is different, and the wristbands are pink, instead of black, but the First Amendment protects our clients no less today than it did fifty years ago. Applying these policies to ban pink wristbands as a silent show of support for women’s sports is unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.”
If the school acted as the lawsuit indicates, it is difficult to imagine how this would not be a clear violation of the First Amendment – especially since the plaintiffs were not engaging in disruptive behavior. It would be hard to argue, with a straight face, that wearing wristbands could somehow disrupt a soccer match or any other sporting event.
In this story, as well as several others, the district is displaying an evident bias against those who disagree with biological males playing in girls sports. If they had been advocating in favor of trans-identified athletes in sports, it is doubtful the school would have reacted in this manner.
This is how progressives enforce their ideology. By using the power of government, they seek to intimidate and cow people into remaining silent. It is the only recourse the authoritarian left has at this point. Since most people understand basic biology, it would be nearly impossible to use persuasion to get them to embrace their warped ideas on sex and gender. This is why they must resort to government force.
Fortunately, the legal system exists for a reason. Hopefully, this lawsuit will succeed. When folks on the left are willing to leverage the government as a weapon, lawfare becomes one of the most effective counterattacks.
