The Bow School District was acting within its authority to kick two soccer dads out of a girls game for wearing pink “XX” wristbands as a silent protest against biological males playing on girls’ teams, a federal judge ruled Monday.
But one of the dads, Anthony Foote, told NHJournal he plans to keep fighting for what he sees as the rights of women and girls.
“What was our offense? Supporting girls’ sports and defending biological reality?” Foote said. “This ruling is a slap in the face to every parent who believes schools should be a place of fairness, not political indoctrination. The judge openly admitted that Pride flags are allowed because they promote ‘inclusion,’ but wristbands defending women’s sports are banned because they might ‘offend’ someone. That’s viewpoint discrimination, plain and simple — and it’s unconstitutional.”
United States District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe ruled against Foote, Kyle Fellers, Eldon Rash, and Nicole Foote in a 45-page order denying their preliminary injunction against SAU 67. The parents are being represented by the Institute for Free Speech, a legal nonprofit that promotes parents’ rights. Del Kolde, the senior attorney, said he is still considering his next steps in this case.
“We strongly disagree with the Court’s opinion issued today denying our request for a preliminary injunction. This was adult speech in a limited public forum, which enjoys greater First Amendment protection than student speech in the classroom. Bow School District officials were obviously discriminating based on viewpoint because they perceived the XX wristbands to be ‘trans-exclusionary.’ We are still evaluating our options for next steps,” Kolde said.
The crux of McAuliffe’s ruling is that while Fellers, Foote, and the others acted within their First Amendment rights to protest, venues like school athletic events are considered “limited public forums” and school officials acted within their legal authority to restrict what the parents said and did.
“The question then becomes whether the School District can manage its athletic events and its athletic fields and facilities — that is, its limited public forum — in a manner that protects its students from adult speech that can reasonably be seen to target a specific student participating in the event (as well as other similar gender-identifying students) by invited adult spectators, when that speech demeans, harasses, intimidates, and bullies. The answer is straightforward: Of course it can. Indeed, school authorities are obligated to do so,” McAuliffe wrote.
For days before the Sept. 10, 2024, game, Anthony Foote and Fellers made it known to school officials that they were unhappy Bow High School was going to play a game against a girls’ team with a biological male player, Parker Tirrell.
Days before the game, Tirrell made national news with a court victory against the state of New Hampshire’s law barring biological males from girls’ sports.
The dads went on social media to discuss various protest ideas, according to the evidence in the case. McAuliffe wrote that it is reasonable, given the context of the game, for SAU 67 administrators to be concerned that the potential protests would be interpreted by Tirrell as bullying and harassing.
And as such, the judge ruled, the school had the right to limit the dads’ speech.
“The message generally ascribed to the XX symbol, in a context such as that presented here, can reasonably be understood as directly assaulting those who identify as transgender women,” McAuliffe wrote. “Because gender identities are characteristics of personal identity that are ‘unalterable or otherwise deeply rooted,’ the demeaning of which ‘strikes a person at the core of his being,’ and because Bow school authorities reasonably interpreted the symbols used by plaintiffs, in context, as conveying a demeaning and harassing message, they properly interceded to protect students from injuries likely to be suffered.”
Fellers and Foote have maintained they were not targeting or harassing any particular student with their wristbands. McAuliffe ruled that, even accepting their stated intent not to harass Tirrell, the broader context for the game made the SAU’s actions reasonable and justified.
“While plaintiffs may very well have never intended to communicate a demeaning or harassing message directed at Parker Tirrell or any other transgender students, the symbols and posters they displayed were fully capable of conveying such a message. And, that broader messaging is what the school authorities reasonably understood and appropriately tried to prevent,” McAuliffe said.
Critics of the judge’s ruling say that it is clearly viewpoint discrimination and the judge’s view that “gender identity” is “inalterable” isn’t based on biological fact or in law.
McAuliffe has yet to rule on the permanent injunction. Fellers, Foote, and the other parents are seeking to allow them to protest at school games and other events.
