Judge rules straight, cisgender principal not discriminated against after LGBTQ+ advocacy in school
A judge ruled that a principal was not discriminated against after advocating for the LGBTQ+ community at school. (Getty)
A judge has ruled that a straight, cisgender principal in Minnesota was not discriminated against after she was removed from her position for LGBTQ+ advocacy at school.Â
On 25 September, a federal judge ruled that the principal would not be protected from alleged retaliation due to her advocacy of the queer community at her school, and is not protected under the First Amendment.
The Thomas v. Marshall Pub Schs case saw the middle school principal Mary Kay Thomas alleging that she was discriminated against after she installed pride flags at her school, and launched a Gay-Straight Alliance. After backlash from her inclusivity, the school board and superintendent removed her from the role, with the installations at the school being allegedly carried out against the wishes of board members and the superintendent.Â
Thomas argued that the board went against Title VII, Title IX, and the First Amendment as she was protecting marginalised groups at the school. However, U.S. District Court Judge Patrick J. Schiltz said that as Thomas described herself as a “straight, cisgender woman”, she is not afforded the same legal protections as those in the LGBTQ+ community.Â
Schiltz said: “The district acted against Thomas because of hostility to her views, not because of hostility to her sex, and thus the district would have discriminated against Thomas in exactly the same way had she been a man.”
Her First Amendment claim was also not applicable, as Thomas did not act as a private citizen in defence of LGBTQ+ rights, but rather as the school headteacher. Schiltz also ruled that it was not unlawful for the principal to be criticised due to her advocacy, as the backlash concerned her work duties, rather than independent speech.
Schiltz also ruled it was not retaliation as Thomas did not prove that she was removed from her position due to her advocacy initiatives specifically, rather than due to not following the orders of staff members and her superiors.
Thomas’ claims were dismissed without prejudice, meaning she will remain employed with the school district in her new administrative role, which was reportedly created just for her.
Jeremy Williams, superintendent and defendant in the case, said via a press release: “Marshall Public Schools is ready to close the chapter on this prolonged and costly unjustified litigation.
“I am proud to serve this district, where we honour and support each and every student, ensuring they have the opportunity to learn and grow in a positive environment.”
Thomas’ lawyer, David Schlesinger, said that they are deciding whether to appeal or file an additional claim to the state court. “The Court’s order did not end the case.”
