Judge rules queer teachers have a right to use their chosen pronouns in First Amendment victory

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Florida education officials must allow a transgender teacher to use she/her pronouns in school.

The teacher, Katie Wood, along with a nonbinary teacher, AV Schwandes, filed a lawsuit late last year challenging Florida’s HB 1069. The law, signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis last year, states that “an employee or contractor of a public K-12 educational institution may not provide to a student his or her preferred personal title or pronouns if such preferred personal title or pronouns do not correspond to his or her sex.” Violations of the law are punishable by termination and even suspension or revocation of a teaching certificate.

Related:

Following the passage of HB 1069, Wood — a math teacher at Lennard High School who had legally changed her name and gender markers on her government-issued documents and gone by “Ms. Wood” for four years — was told by the school’s principal that she could no longer refer to herself as “Miss.” Schwandes, meanwhile, was fired from their position at Florida Virtual School (FLVS), a statewide online public school where they taught physics, in October after coming out as nonbinary and refusing to use gendered pronouns.

Stay connected to your community

Connect with the issues and events that impact your community at home and beyond by subscribing to our newsletter.

The two teachers sued state officials, including the Florida Department of Education, arguing that HB 1069 violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Title IX, and the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. They sought an injunction to stop the law’s enforcement, as well as a preliminary injunction based on their Title VII and First Amendment claims.

On Tuesday, Judge Mark Walker granted Wood’s request for a preliminary injunction based on her First Amendment claims, blocking the state from enforcing HB 1069 against her.

“Once again, the State of Florida has a First Amendment problem,” Walker wrote in his decision. “This time, the State of Florida declares that it has the absolute authority to redefine your identity if you choose to teach in a public school. So, the question before this Court is whether the First Amendment permits the State to dictate, without limitation, how public-school teachers refer to themselves when communicating to students. The answer is a thunderous ‘no.’”

“The State of Florida has not justified this grave restraint, and so the United States Constitution does not tolerate it,” Walker wrote. “Ours is a Union of individuals, celebrating ourselves and singing ourselves and being ourselves without apology.”

Walker noted, however, that “the First Amendment issue in this case is not about whether a public school teacher can require students — or anyone — to use their preferred pronouns and title when speaking to or about them.”

Walker denied both Wood’s and Schwandes’s requests for preliminary injunctions based on their claims that the law violates federal employment discrimination protections under Title VII.

“The record before this court does not indicate that Ms. Wood was transferred, demoted, or passed over for training or promotion. Further, Ms. Wood has not asserted that the prestige or responsibility of her position as an educator has been diminished,” Walker wrote.

Schwandes, Walker ruled, lacked standing for their Title VII claim because they are not currently employed and are not currently seeking employment as teachers in Florida. Walker denied Schwandes’s request for a preliminary injunction based on First Amendment violations as well, writing that “Mx. Schwandes has not come forward with any evidence showing that they intend to engage in speech in the foreseeable future that would violate” HB 1069.

Walker’s ruling for Wood is also limited to her. Wood, Walker wrote, “has not alleged a First Amendment overbreadth claim in her complaint. Nor has she persuasively explained why she is entitled to a statewide injunction.”

“Accordingly, based on this record, the scope of the preliminary injunction in this case need extend no further than prohibiting defendants from enforcing the challenged provision against Ms. Wood to protect her interests while this case remains pending,” Walker ruled.