Yeah, Right…

So the courts said it wasn’t discrimination that she was fired for supporting us.

Judge rules straight, cisgender principal not discriminated against after LGBTQ+ advocacy in school

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. 

Pink News

October 1, 2024

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. 

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.

She claimed that her First Amendment right to her speech and associate with others were violated,

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.

I am not a lawyer but it seems to me that the judge got it wrong, does he mean that her civil rights goes out the door when you have a job? They are deciding if they want to appeal.

The Supreme Court is making it harder to sue for discrimination thanks to Trump far-right judges and there will be another judge who will probably retire in the next four years… do you want Trump to pick another judge.