The local middle schooler who was barred from wearing an “only two genders” shirt to school has lost his federal appeals case, as his attorneys consider a Supreme Court appeal.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit in Boston has ruled against Middleboro student Liam Morrison in the high-profile First Amendment case.
Liam, now in 8th grade, last year was banned by school officials from wearing a shirt to school that read, “There are only two genders.” The 7th grader then wore a shirt that stated, “There are censored genders,” and again, he was ordered to take off the shirt.
A U.S. district judge previously ruled in favor of the Middleboro school officials, and the appeals court over the weekend affirmed the district court’s ruling.
“This case is about much more than a t-shirt,” a lawyer for the Massachusetts Family Institute said in response to the appeals court ruling. “The court’s decision is not only a threat to the free speech rights of public school students across the country, but a threat to basic biological truths.”
“While we are disappointed in this decision, we aren’t done fighting yet,” the attorney Sam Whiting added. “Along with our partners at Alliance Defending Freedom, we are reviewing all legal options, including appealing to the United States Supreme Court.”
The Middleboro school district each year celebrates Pride month, hanging Pride flags and sending the message that there are “an unlimited number of genders,” one of Liam’s lawyers had argued in front of the appeals court.
In response to the school’s view, Liam wore the controversial shirt to Nichols Middle School last year.
School officials in response to the shirt told Liam to either take off the shirt or leave school for the day. Liam chose to miss the rest of his classes that day.
When the Middleboro principal pulled Liam out of class and told him he had to take off his shirt, the principal said they had received complaints about the words on his shirt — and that the words might make some students feel unsafe.
“Middleborough was enforcing a dress code, so it was making a forecast regarding the disruptive impact of a particular means of expression and not of, say, a stray remark on a playground, a point made during discussion or debate, or a classroom inquiry,” the appeals court ruling reads. “The forecast concerned the predicted impact of a message that would confront any student proximate to it throughout the school day.”
School officials “knew the serious nature of the struggles, including suicidal ideation, that some of those students had experienced related to their treatment based on their gender identities by other students, and the effect those struggles could have on those students’ ability to learn.” the appeals court wrote.
“We think it was reasonable for Middleborough to forecast that a message displayed throughout the school day denying the existence of the gender identities of transgender and gender non-conforming students would have a serious negative impact on those students’ ability to concentrate on their classroom work,” the court added.
The court decision will allow schools to silence dissent, according to the Massachusetts Family Institute.
Whiting added, “Although there was no evidence that Liam’s message caused a disruption at school, the court held that the possibility that some students might suffer psychological distress from his shirt was enough to justify censoring him.”
