GOP official just banned “Everyone is Welcome Here” signs in schools because they’re too Democratic

SCOTUS rules parents have a right to prevent their kids from reading books with LGBTQ+ characters

*This is reported by LGBTQ Nation.

The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in Mahmoud v. Taylor, the case brought by parents who said that their First Amendment rights were violated when schools used books that included LGBTQ+ characters.

The decision was 6-3 along ideological lines, with the Republican-appointed justices siding with the religious parents who wanted to opt their children out of reading books like Prince & Knight and Uncle Bobby’s Wedding in the Montgomery County, Maryland, school system.

“The Court does not accept the Board’s characterizations of the LGBTQ+-inclusive instruction as mere ‘exposure to objectionable ideas’ or as lessons in ‘mutual respect,’” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority. “The storybooks unmistakably convey a particular viewpoint about same-sex marriage and gender.”

“Regardless, the question in cases of this kind is whether the educational requirement or curriculum at issue would ‘substantially interfere with the religious development’ of the child or pose ‘a very real threat of undermining’ the religious beliefs and practices the parent wishes to instill in the child.”

“Casting aside longstanding precedent, the Court invents a constitutional right to avoid exposure to ‘subtle’ themes ‘contrary to the religious principles’ that parents wish to instill in their children,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion. “Exposing students to the ‘message’ that LGBTQ people exist, and that their loved ones may celebrate their marriages and life events, the majority says, is enough to trigger the most demanding form of judicial scrutiny.”

The case involved several sets of Christian and Muslim parents who objected to their kids reading books that mentioned LGBTQ+ people. The district had an opt-out policy that they later rescinded because, the district claimed, the opt-outs were becoming “unworkable.”

Some parents in the district protested to get the opt-out policy reinstated, while others protested in favor of learning about LGBTQ+ people.

“The books geared to younger kids are just showing a diverse range of families,” said Christina Celenza, a mother of a student in the district, during one of the 2023 protests. “We have a two-mom household, so my wife and I are really proud and out, and, of course, my kid in kindergarten or pre-K is going to probably talk about his family and his two moms.”

The district didn’t budge, so several parents sued. Two lower courts denied them a preliminary injunction, but the Supreme Court just granted them one.

The parents want the courts to ultimately order teachers to notify them of every possible discussion where LGBTQ+ people may come up so that they could opt their children out, lest their kids learn that LGBTQ+ people exist. They claimed that knowing that LGBTQ+ people exist is contrary to their religious beliefs and violates their right to direct their children’s religious upbringing.

Public education advocates warn that the ruling could lead to even more requests for opt-outs of public education on wide-ranging topics including Earth Day, critical thinking, and anti-drug programs.

Free speech and LGBTQ+ advocates denounced the ruling.

“This ruling is a deeply disappointing blow to the right to read under the First Amendment,” said U.S. Free Expression Programs staff attorney for PEN America Elly Brinkley in a statement. “It is a fundamental betrayal of public schools’ duty to prepare students to live in a diverse and pluralistic society. By allowing parents to pull their children out of classrooms when they object to particular content, the justices are laying the foundation for a new frontier in the assault on books of all kinds in schools.”

“While religious liberty is fundamentally important, it should not force public schools to exempt students from lessons that don’t align with their families’ personal religious or cultural beliefs,” said Equality California Executive Director Tony Hoang in a statement. “LGBTQ+ themed books are already among the most banned and challenged in school districts and libraries across the country. Today’s decision will make it even harder for these books to find their way into the hands of students who simply want to read — and who may find validation and acceptance in the process.”

“Today’s ruling does not change schools’ obligation to prepare students to interact with and thrive in a diverse and ever-changing world,” said GLAD Law’s Mary L. Bonauto. “LGBTQ+ people and families exist, students in our public schools have LGBTQ+ parents, and books that include LGBTQ+ people should not be treated differently than those without LGBTQ+ people.”

“The Court’s decision does not require our schools to abandon these efforts. Parents, students, educators, and neighbors can encourage opportunities for learning about diverse people and families by staying involved with school districts, school boards, and in our local communities.”

June 28, 2025 0

Amid Trump’s funding threats, a rural Colorado school district looks to remove LGBTQ policy protections

*This is reported by Chalkbeat.

Citing President Trump’s threat to cut off federal education funding for school districts that provide protections for LGBTQ people, school board members in the Montezuma-Cortez district in southwestern Colorado are poised to remove sexual orientation and gender identity from the district’s nondiscrimination policy.

“Our district uses federal grant monies and Trump has indicated those grants are at risk if any district continues to support certain previously protected classes like sexual orientation, gender expression, or gender identity,” Mike Lynch, a school board member and the policy committee chair, said at a board meeting late last month.

The proposed policy changes in Montezuma-Cortez represent just one example of how some Colorado school districts are rushing to comply — or over-comply — with federal ultimatums based on questionable legal foundations. Many legal experts say the Trump administration cannot, on its own, exclude transgender people from federal anti-discrimination law and that Colorado law, which includes protections for LGBTQ people, supersedes school district policy anyway.

But efforts to remove protections at the local level send harmful messages about who is valued and who isn’t, they say.

“I think it does damage to queer students because it signals that this school district … doesn’t believe that these students are worthy of protection,” Scott Skinner-Thompson, associate professor of law at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Montezuma-Cortez, a conservative-leaning district with about 2,400 students, has taken other steps to curtail LGBTQ symbols and school activities in recent years. The school board is scheduled to take a final vote on the proposed nondiscrimination policy on June 24.

MB McAfee, a retired social worker and district resident, said she doesn’t know of any case where federal funds were withheld by the Trump administration, but worries about that possibility, particularly when it comes to money for students with disabilities.

But she’s also angry about the proposed policy changes, calling them “another step toward exclusion.”

“If we do that,” she asked, “then what’s going to be next?”

School districts react to funding threats

Trump has targeted transgender rights since his first day in office. In January and February, he issued several executive orders on the topic, including one that describes sex as determined at conception and unchangeable and another that threatens to withhold federal funds from schools that allow transgender girls to play girls sports.

The Trump administration has moved to strip federal funding from Maine because that state allows transgender girls to compete on girls’ teams. A judge blocked the federal government from withholding school lunch money while the case continues.

So far, no school district has lost money because of policies protecting transgender students. But Lynch emphasized that risk when he explained the proposed policy revision to the school board in May.

Asked by Chalkbeat what executive order or federal guidance required the removal of “sexual orientation” from the policy, Lynch later said by email that he’d mistakenly cited the term when he spoke to the board about federal dollars being in jeopardy.

For now though, “sexual orientation” isn’t being restored to the policy, he said.

Montezuma-Cortez isn’t alone in making changes spurred by the Trump administration. Officials from several Colorado districts, including Woodland Park and District 49 near Colorado Springs, have cited Trump’s executive orders in pushing policy changes or other efforts aimed at revoking protections for transgender students.

In May, District 49 sued the state and the Colorado High School Activities Association arguing that Colorado law and the association’s policy violate students’ constitutional rights by allowing transgender youth to play on school sports teams that match their gender identity.

Montezuma-Cortez school board members had little to say about the implications of the proposed nondiscrimination policy changes.

Asked about the legal or practical implications, Lynch said he’s not an attorney and doesn’t know. School board President Sheri Noyes did not respond to Chalkbeat’s request for comment. Vice President Ed Rice declined to respond to specific questions from Chalkbeat, saying by email that the policy’s opening sentence “answers everything.”

As proposed, that sentence says, “The Board is committed to providing a learning and work environment where all members of the school community are treated with dignity and respect.” The current version of the policy says “safe learning and work environment” but the revision takes out the word “safe.”

June 10, 2025 0

Democrats lash out as Texas Legislature bans school clubs that support gay teens

*This is reported by the Texas Tribune

Democrats took to the floor of the Texas House on Saturday to label a ban on clubs that support gay teens the work of “monsters” and to say the ban endangers children and strips them of their dignity.

The Democratic representatives grew emotional in opposition to a bill that would ban K-12 student clubs focused on sexuality and gender identity.

Senate Bill 12, authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, won final legislative passage Saturday after lawmakers in both chambers adopted the conference committee reports that specifically clarified that schools will be banned from authorizing or sponsoring student clubs based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Backers proclaimed that the bill enshrines a parent’s rights and puts the parent not just at the table, but at the head of the table where the child’s best interests are decided. They also targeted diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, claiming that they project ideologies on students and put too much focus on race, sexuality and gender identity instead of the quality of education.

Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston, emphasized that these clubs exist because of a long history of oppression against the LGBTQ+ community. He warned against demonizing students and teachers for discussing gender and sexuality.

“The real monsters are not kids trying to figure out who they are,” Wu said during the House discussion. “The monsters are not the teachers who love them and encourage them and support them. They are not the books that provide them with some amount of comfort and information. The real monsters are here.”

Lawmakers shared personal stories about LGBTQ+ youth. Rep. Rafael Anchía said his daughter was a vice president of a pride club at her school. He stressed that these clubs “are no more about sex than 4-H or ROTC or the basketball team.”

“It wasn’t a sex club,” Anchía said. “They’d get together and they’d watch movies. They’d color. They’d go to musicals. It was about a kid who felt weird who found her people and everything about it was good. I don’t know why grown-ups in this body are so triggered with my daughter getting together with her classmates in a school-sponsored activity.”

Anchía also told the Texas Tribune he “didn’t sign up for five anti-LGBT bills this session.”

Rep. Jolanda Jones, D-Houston, shared her experience as a Black woman and a lesbian, saying she didn’t come out until the age of 50 because she knew “the world wasn’t safe.” She warned that banning LGBTQ+ clubs could worsen bullying.

“And we have the nerve to say that we care about mental health,” Jones said. “We’ve passed bill after bill about access to care, about youth suicide, about prevention and treatment. But this bill makes kids sicker, sadder, more alone. This bill doesn’t protect children. It endangers them. It doesn’t give parents more rights. It strips children of their dignity.”

SB 12 is often referred to as the “Parental Bill of Rights” because it claims to give parents more control over their children’s schools. But Rep. Erin Zwiener, D-Driftwood, addressed those who are “afraid that your kids or your grandkids might grow up queer,” warning that the bill could harm family relationships.

“Getting silence in schools from the LGBTQ community, which is what this bill is designed to do, will not stop your kids from being gay,” Zwiener said. “It will just make them afraid to come out. It will make them afraid to live their lives as their full selves. It will make them afraid to tell you when they figure out that they’re LGBTQ and it might damage your relationship with them forever.”

Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth, argued that allowing religious organizations in schools but banning “clubs that allow students to be who they are, is a double standard that flies in the face of the principles you say you support.”

“An LGBTQ person can’t change who they are any more than the fact that I can’t change that I’m Black,” Collier said. “What you’re saying to students today is that you will be accepted as long as you are who we say you should be.”

If signed by the governor, the bill will become law on Sept. 1.

May 31, 2025 0

Police officers forcibly remove mom of trans kid from meeting for saying just one word

*This is being reported by LGBTQNation.

The mother of a transgender child who tried to speak out against proposed changes to her school district’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies was forcibly removed by four police officers when she said one word at a meeting of the City Schools of Decatur Board of Education on Tuesday evening.

That word was “cowards.”

“I’m practicing my rights as a parent. I’m in no way resisting,” she said as she was carried out. “I’m not resisting, and this is what fascists do!”

Kotler went to the emergency board meeting to speak against changes to the district’s DEI policy, which used to require that “all learning environments… be inclusive, safe, secure, and supportive while also ensuring that no student group is marginalized.” This policy, as well as four others, was changed to remove words like “equity” and “Americans with Disabilities Act.” Two of the policies were rescinded completely.

The district’s DEI policy now states that it is “designed to achieve fair and just access to opportunity and resources that provide all humans the ability to thrive.”

Kotler, who is the mother of three children, including one transgender daughter and one nonbinary child, went to the meeting and shouted “Cowards!” at the board. Advocate reports that Board Chair Carmen Sulton asked her to leave.

“I said one word, I have already stated I have no intention of speaking again until public comment,” she responded. “I’m going to sit here. I have offered that if it makes the board feel comfortable, you, as a security employee, are welcome to sit next to me. If I speak again outside of public comment, I will leave. I have the right to be here, I have not used harsh language or threats.”

Police then approached her, but she didn’t get up. So they lifted her out of her seat and dragged her away, dropping her off on the stairs in front of the building.

“I’m practicing my rights as a parent. I’m in no way resisting,” she said as she was dragged off. “I’m not resisting and this is what fascists do!”

“It’s beyond evil that anyone is threatening these programs,” she later told Atlanta News First. “Our children spend a huge chunk of their lives at school. Their own sense of self and self-worth is developed at school. If we stop policies and programs that make those spaces inclusive and safe for everyone, we know what happens.”

“There are marginalized children and economically disadvantaged children in our district who rely on these programs.”

Decatur’s is one of many school districts across the country rewording their DEI policies in light of the new presidential administration’s antipathy towards promoting equal rights for minority students, particularly those who are transgender and nonbinary.

April 19, 2025 0

Trump admin cut off food aid for kids in Maine to punish state over trans athletes. They’re suing.

*This is being reported by LGBTQNation.

When Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) told President Donald Trump, “See you in court,” she meant it.

On Monday, Maine sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins over the department’s halt on federal funding for education programs in the state in retaliation for its refusal to ban transgender women and girls from school sports.

As Reuters notes, Rollins announced the funding freeze in an April 2 letter to Mills, saying that the decision was “only the beginning” but that the governor could “end it at any time by protecting women and girls in compliance with federal law.” The funding freeze jeopardizes programs that provide free or reduced-price meals to children in Maine schools, childcare centers, and after-school programs.

Mills has publicly clashed with the administration, and with Trump specifically, over its assertion that allowing transgender women and girls to participate in women’s and girls’ sports violates Title IX, the federal civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in schools that receive federal funding.

In February, the Maine Principals Association announced that it would not comply with Trump’s February 5 executive order banning transgender student-athletes from participating in girls’ and women’s sports. After Trump threatened to cut off the state’s funding, Mills and Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey accused the president of using school children “as pawns in advancing his political agenda” and vowed to “take all appropriate and necessary legal action to restore that funding and the academic opportunity it provides.”

“The State of Maine will not be intimidated by the president’s threats,” Mills said.

During a February 21 meeting with Democratic and Republican governors at the White House, Trump singled out Mills, asking whether she planned to comply with his anti-trans executive order. Mills said that her state was “complying with the state and federal laws.” When Trump continued to petulantly insist that Mills comply with his order, the governor told the president she would see him in court.

In its lawsuit, Maine calls the USDA’s funding freeze a “blatantly unlawful action” in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. Rollins, the state argues, “took this action without following any of the statutory and regulatory requirements that must be complied with when terminating federal funds based on alleged violations of Title IX.”

The state argues that Rollins provided no legal basis for her assertion that by allowing trans students to participate in women’s and girls’ sports, Maine is in violation of Title IX and that her interpretation of the law is wrong. “Indeed, several federal courts have held that Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause require schools to permit transgender girls and women to play on girls’ and women’s teams,” the complaint reads.

However, the state is not asking the court to interpret Title IX. It merely asks the court to vacate Rollins’s “arbitrary, capricious” funding freeze for failing to meet the “statutory and regulatory requirements that the federal government must comply with before it may freeze federal funds owed to a state.”

In a statement, Frey said that Trump “and his cabinet secretaries do not make the law, and they are not above the law, and this action is necessary to remind the president that Maine will not be bullied into violating the law.”

April 8, 2025 0

Hate influencer Chaya Raichik harasses trans teacher & forces her to resign

*This is reported by LGBTQNation and a follow up to our earlier article breaking this news.

English teacher Rosia Sandri was left “heartbroken” after submitting her resignation on March 31 following a campaign of hate against her that followed a TikTok video she posted highlighting her experience as a trans woman in education. That video was shared by transphobes, who called for her to be fired.

Sandri came out as a trans woman seven years ago and taught English for three years at Red Oak High School in Ellis County, Texas. Sandri said her colleagues at the Red Oak Independent School District (ROISD) supported her, and she didn’t directly come out to her class but instead started dressing differently.

Students who noticed asked if they should call her by a different name or use certain pronouns; she told them they could call her “whatever they were comfortable with” but preferred she/her pronouns.

Sandri also has a TikTok account where she posts informative videos educating people on what it is like to be trans, and she filmed some videos after hours in her classroom.

Many of her former students follow her on that account and express their support in comment section, writing “best teacher ever” and “We miss you, stay strong. Lovely makeup.”

These videos, unfortunately, caught the attention of anti-trans influencer Chaya Raichik, who runs LibsOfTikTok. Raichik reposted one of Sandri’s videos, deadnaming and misgendering her. In the clip, Sandri talked about her pupils being supportive of her journey.

“They call me ‘ma’am. ’ They call me ‘miss,’” she said. “They use my correct pronouns and know my correct name, and it’s incredibly affirming.”

Raichik asked her over 4 million followers, “Would you feel comfortable with this person teaching your kid?”

Raichik is notorious for using her social media following to single out LGBTQ+ people and allies, presenting their innocuous interactions with children as “grooming.” Her followers harass and threaten businesses and institutions that support LGBTQ+ people, some going as far as to send bomb threats to children’s hospitals for providing gender treatment to trans youth. Schools targeted by Libs of TikTok faced similar repercussions.

Sandri was out sick when Libs of TikTok reposted her video but stated that she started receiving threats and harassment on her personal and school email. The human resources department at ROISD and the deputy superintendent reported that they have also received threats and have placed Sandri on administrative leave for two days while the school launches an investigation.

Texas state Rep. Brian Harrison (R) shared the Libs of TikTok post and called for Sandri to be fired.

“As the State Representative for Red Oak ISD, I am demanding that THIS TEACHER BE IMMEDIATELY TERMINATED!” Harrison tweeted.

On Monday, Sandri agreed with the school that she would resign.

“When I signed that resignation, it felt like my dream was being taken away from me,” Sandri told NBC. “I’m not going to get hired again as a teacher in Texas, and that hurts. It hurts I have to leave my students in the middle of the year…they keep on messaging me and asking if it’s illegal to be a trans teacher.”

Harrison later told NBC News that he was proud to have helped remove Sandri from her job.

“Any teacher who claims to get gender euphoria from their minor students and teaches them that boys can become girls should be terminated immediately,” Harrison said.

Despite this, Sandri has stated that she still wants to be a teacher and hopes to find a way.

April 6, 2025 0

Iowa State students, city leaders mourn loss of LGBTQIA+ center, hold ‘funeral’ on campus

*This is reported by the Ames Tribute

A coalition of Iowa State University students and Ames community members held a makeshift funeral Wednesday for Iowa State’s LGBTQIA+ center.

About 50 people gathered in front of Parks Library around a makeshift coffin painted with the LGBTQIA+ flag. Many were wearing black, sporting pride pins or holding pride flags.More: Iowa State students plan on campus ‘funeral’ for Center for LGBTQIA+ Student Success

Iowa State’s Center for LGBTQIA+ Student Success, often referred to as “The Center,” must be restructured and rebranded due to Senate File 2435.

The law, which will take effect on July 1, 2025, prohibits state universities like Iowa State from starting, maintaining or funding DEI offices or positions unless required by law or for accreditation. The Iowa Board of Regents imposed directives and a Dec. 31 deadline to eliminate functions like the Center.

Holding a ‘funeral’ for a community resource

ISU Students Against SF 2435 Coalition published a mock obituary and shared it with the Ames Tribune prior to Wednesday’s event. The obituary said the Center was “killed” on Dec. 31, “with the assistance of Iowa State University.”

“This marks a great loss for the community, and we encourage those impacted to join us and find community in these trying times,” the mock obituary reads.

Several students addressed the crowd on Wednesday, noting how the Center provided them with a safe space to connect with their community. They said they are frustrated that it’s closing. Several said the presence of the Center was a key factor in attending the university.

The Center is a place where LGBTQIA+ students could go for safety and support, Iowa State student Silvera Dudenhoefer said on Wednesday.

“It was a space that celebrated queer joy and accomplishment, academically and personally,” Dudenhoefer said. “Above all, it was a clear mark that LGBTQIA+ students mattered to this school.”

By removing the LGBTQIA+ from the Center, Dudenhoefer said the Board of Regents has “shown who they’re willing to push aside in an effort to comply.”

The Center, according to Iowa State’s website, is still open from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, on the fourth floor of the Iowa State Memorial Union. Iowa State now lists The Center under the umbrella of multicultural student affairs.

‘The Center’ has been a LGBTQIA+ student resource for more than 30 years

Iowa State University’s Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Student Services (LGBTSS) opened on Nov. 8, 1992, and was housed above Student Services. It was initially staffed by student volunteers until 1997, when four full-time staff members were brought on.

The LGBTSS was rebranded as The Center for LGBTQIA+ Student Success in 2019 and relocated to the Memorial Union.

The Center is “a space for you to be yourself, find and build community, get involved, and explore lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and ally life at Iowa State University,” according to the school’s website.

Senator Quirmbach voices support for ‘encouraging’ campus environment

Senator Herman Quirmbach of Ames attended Wednesday’s gathering and addressed the crowd. He said Iowa State has a responsibility to provide a supportive and encouraging environment for every student, regardless of their background.

“This university is failing in its moral responsibility,” Quirmbach said. “The members of the Board of Regents are failing. And the legislature? Don’t get me started.”

Iowa State graduate student Amanda Thomas assured the gathered students that they have allies willing to support them.

“When attacks like this hurt my friends, my family, my coworkers and my peers, it hurts me and that’s not okay,” Thomas said. “Allies are here, even if you can’t see them.”

Reverand Kelli Clement from the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Ames said students are learning to take the “stone in their shoe” that came with Senate File 2435 being passed.

“When you find your people, it is a holy moment,” Clement said. “And the loss of this center does not mean that your people go away.”

Students against SF-2435 protest Iowa law

The ISU Students Against SF 2435 coalition was formed to combat the law’s ensuing impact. The group’s first protest was held Oct. 24. The students protested the law again on Nov. 20.

The group also filed a pair of petitions on Change.org, one for the Board of Regents and another for the Iowa Legislature.

April 3, 2025 0

North Texas teacher resigns after backlash over TikTok pronoun video

*This is being reported by WFAA.

For seven months, Red Oak ISD was a sanctuary for Rosalyn Sandri. She described it as a place where she pursued her lifelong dream of being a teacher.

But today, she’s no longer in the classroom.

Sandri, an English teacher, shared a video on TikTok talking about how her students had embraced her pronouns and showed respect by addressing her as “ma’am.”

“When I told them I changed my pronouns, they jumped right into it,” she said on Tuesday.

But Sandri said when the post was reposted on X, formerly known as Twitter, by the account Libs of TikTok, it went viral, racking up 3.2 million views.

That’s when the backlash began.

Sandri said she began receiving death threats and hateful emails, even through her school email account.

“I got a notice that told me to eat a bullet,” she said.

The video also caught the attention of Texas State Representative Brian Harrison, who publicly called for her resignation.

“Schools are for education, not indoctrination,” Harrison said over Zoom on Tuesday.

“Teaching children, minors, that boys can become girls, and girls can become boys is at odds with objective reality. And the biological reality is that there are only two sexes,” said Harrison.

In a statement to WFAA, Red Oak ISD confirmed that Sandri resigned effective immediately on Monday, March 31.

“In light of recent attention, Red Oak High School English teacher Sandri has resigned, effective March 31, 2025. Any other information is a personnel matter, and we are not at liberty to discuss.”

Sandri said she felt she had no choice but to step away for her safety and the safety of the school and students.

“When I resigned, I felt like I was signing away my ability to teach in the state of Texas. I don’t know that another school will touch me now,” she said.

“Being a teacher is all I ever wanted to do since I was five years old,” she said.

Now, she fears her career in Texas is over.

April 1, 2025 0

Ohio ‘Given Name Act’ proposes strict rules for names, pronouns in schools

*This is being reported by NBC4i.

Ohio’s “Parents’ Bill of Rights” won’t go into effect for two more weeks, but House Republicans are already proposing amendments, including one that would penalize districts that used students’ chosen names and pronouns without parent permission.

Reps. Jonathan Newman (R-Troy) and Josh Williams (R-Sylvania Township) introduced House Bill 190 on Monday, which would require public schools to have parent permission to refer to a student by a name or pronoun that differs from what is listed on their birth certificate. Schools that violate the “Given Name Act” would be denied state funding and open themselves to lawsuits.

“It’s to make sure that parents can exercise, reconstitute the right to control the upbringing of their children, even inside of school buildings,” Williams said.

The bill also bans public school employees or contractors from requiring students or staff to respect students’ chosen names or pronouns. Even with parent permission, schools would not be allowed to subject staff or students to “adverse action” for declining to use a student’s preferred name and pronouns.

Although students older than 18 could personally request to be addressed differently under HB 190, teachers could not. The proposed bill would ban school employees from sharing their pronouns or titles if they differ from what is listed on the employee’s personal birth certificate. Williams said requiring students to use teachers’ pronouns makes young students affirm that genders can be changed.

After Florida enacted a similar ban in 2023, the state faced lawsuits from transgender and gender variant teachers, including high school teacher Katie Wood. A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that said the state’s ban on preferred pronouns violated Wood’s First Amendment rights, and a federal court heard oral arguments in October 2024. However, the court withdrew its interest in the case on Feb. 26, before a ruling was issued.

The law would not apply to derivatives, or generally accepted nicknames, of birth names. For instance, if director Spike Lee were an Ohio student, he could be called Shelton or Shel, from his given name Shelton Jackson Lee. However, he would need written permission to be called Spike under HB 190.

“We’ve got big problems and issues to deal with in our schools, in higher education,” Ohio House Minority Leader Rep. Allison Russo (D-Upper Arlington) said. “What we’re seeing and this sort of going back to pronouns and attacking diversity, equity and inclusion, it’s a distraction.”

The Given Name Act also establishes a complaint system through the Department of Education and Workforce. If the department determines a school district violated the law, the state would then withhold 10% of the school’s funding every month until the state determined they were now compliant. The bill also allows families to sue for monetary relief if a district or staff member knowingly violates it.

“There’s always discretionary funds that the Supreme Court has noted that we provide to school districts that we’re not constitutionally required to provide,” Williams said. “So that’s a funding mechanism that if school districts don’t want to comply with state law, there has to be some repercussions.”

HB 190 would update the Parents’ Bill of Rights, which will go into effect on April 9 and already requires schools to alert parents and guardians if a student requests to go by a name or pronoun that is different from what was assigned at birth.

April 1, 2025 0