#

Why would Kearsarge School Board Chair Alison Mastin threaten to have a member of the public arrested for speaking at a public meeting?

According to the new lawsuit filed in the United States District Court in Concord, because the speaker called a biological male athlete who identifies as female a “tall boy.”

Beth Scaer, a well-known conservative Granite State activist, made her comment during an August meeting as the Kearsarge board was dealing with the state’s new law banning biological males from girls’ sports. Kearsarge is home to champion high school athlete Maelle Jacques, a boy who identifies as a girl and won first place in the girls’ high jump competition last year.

Maelle Jacques is not named in the lawsuit, but referred to as MJ. The Kearsarge School Board voted this summer to ignore the new law in order to allow Jacques to keep playing.

Maelle Jacques

During the August board meeting, “Mastin ruled Scaer out of order, declared the remainder of her three minutes forfeited, and stated that she would be removed by the police if she continued to speak. Mastin was visibly angry at Scaer,” the lawsuit states.

“School boards cannot invent speech rules on the fly to silence citizens expressing views they dislike,” said Institute for Free Speech Attorney Nathan Ristuccia, who is representing Scaer. “This unwritten rule about ‘derogatory’ comments gives the board unchecked power to determine which speech is acceptable and which isn’t—precisely what the First Amendment prohibits.”

Beth Scaer and her husband, Stephen “Sidewalk Steve” Scaer, came out to support the law that they say protects women and girls. They may have been the only ones in the room willing to speak out in favor of it, according to the lawsuit. 

All of the people who wanted to have their say during the public comment period were allotted three minutes, but warned “not [to] speak derogatorily about anyone or anything.” Jacques spoke, as did Stephen Scaer, who went into detail about “experimental gender medicine.”

Beth Scaer was the only speaker that night to get cut off before her three minutes were up. She started her prepared remarks about the potential physical dangers male athletes pose to females, noting that Jacques is much larger than the girls on the Kearsarge soccer team. When she used the phrase “tall boy” to describe Jacques’ physique, the hammer came down.

“Mastin interrupted and disallowed Scaer from saying anything further,” the lawsuit states.

Beth Scaer

Scaer was not told what law she broke or rule she violated during her short time speaking to justify getting threatened with police removal. It was later added to the board meeting minutes that the “tall boy” comment was the social sin. 

New Hampshire’s law banning biological males from girls’ sports has since been struck down by a federal judge using the controversial premise that males who identify as female are “girls” in the same way that biological girls are. That premise is likely to be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Scaer says the lawsuit isn’t about her, it’s about protecting free speech.

“Everyone deserves an equal opportunity to address their elected officials without fear of censorship,” Scaer said. “This case is about ensuring that all citizens, regardless of their viewpoint, can participate in public meetings and comment on issues that are important to the community.”

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. 

It’s not an Appeal to Heaven, but to the First Circuit Court of Appeals for Nashua residents Beth and Stephen Scaer in their Pine Tree flag fight with the city.

The Scaers filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction against Nashua after they were denied an application to fly the Revolutionary War-era banner, which includes the slogan “An Appeal to Heaven,” by Nashua officials. On Friday, lawyers for the Scaers’ filed notice in the federal court of their intention to go to the appeals court in Boston.

Last Month, United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty denied their motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling the couple was likely to lose their case on the merits. McCafferty relied on Magistrate Judge Talesha Saint-Marc’s review and report of the case in her ruling. 

According to McCafferty and Saint-Marc, the city did not violate the Scaers’ free speech rights when it denied their flag application. They argue the city’s application process for requests to fly flags on the city’s Citizen’s Flag Pole is an example of an allowable government speech restriction that does not infringe on the First Amendment.

Nathan Ristuccia, an attorney with the legal nonprofit The Institute for Free Speech, insists the court is wrong and that the treatment of the Scaers, who are outspoken political conservatives, is viewpoint discrimination.

“The City of Nashua cannot manipulate government speech doctrine into a ruse for subsidizing viewpoints they like and discriminating against those they disfavor,” Ristuccia wrote in a motion arguing against Saint-Marc’s report. “The City has sought to maintain the Citizen Flag Pole as a forum for favored constituents while using its written policy to create a superficial appearance of compliance with (prior free speech ruling) Shurtleff v. City of Boston.”

In the past, the Nashua city government has allowed flags celebrating Pride Month, transgender rights, as well as ethnic heritage with the national flags of Greece and the Dominican Republic. However, the city has also rejected previous requests to fly symbols advocating pro-life politics, libertarianism, and protecting women’s sports from biological males. 

The city adopted a flag pole policy in 2022, after several rejected applications, that states in part, “[the] flag pole is not intended to serve as a forum for free expression by the public.”

Ristuccia calls the policy an attempt at invoking “magic words” to get around the First Amendment claims of people whose applications were rejected. The Scaers had their Pine Tree Riot flag rejected in 2024 when the city informed them the Revolutionary War banner is not “in harmony with city policies and messages that the city wishes to express and endorse.”

The city’s rejection of the Pine Tree Riot flags is not about Nashua officials harboring royalist sentiment. Instead, officials are being swayed by current political prejudices seemingly shared by Saint-Marc. In her report, Saint-Marc determined the flag the Scaers wanted to fly is a symbol that’s been coopted by the “far right.”

“The record also indicates that the flag was used during the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.,” Saint-Marc wrote.

City Attorney Jonathan Barnes likened the Scaer’s request to fly the Pine Tree Riot flag at city hall to flying a Nazi flag during his arguments in front of Saint-Marc.

“I mean, [Ristuccia] would have you believe that we can raise the Nazi flag to commemorate Hitler’s birthday. I think that’s totally unreasonable, and it certainly wouldn’t be in the city’s best interests to do that,” Barnes said in court.

The 1772 Pine Tree Riot took place in Weare and is considered a pivotal event that led to the American Revolution. The flag has long been associated with patriotic movements. The Scaers wanted to fly the flag on the anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill to honor New Hampshire Minutemen.

A federal judge ruled Friday the City of Nashua did not violate resident Beth Scaer’s First Amendment rights when it denied her permission to fly the “Appeal to Heaven” Pine Tree flag on the citizen’s flag pole.

“The Magistrate Judge correctly found that the undisputed facts indicate that the flags displayed on the Citizen Flag Pole pursuant to Nashua’s 2022 Flagpole Policy constituted government speech not regulated by the First Amendment,” ruled United States District Court Judge Landya McCafferty.

For years, the City of Nashua had a policy of making a flagpole at City Hall available, upon request, to citizens who wanted to celebrate or demonstrate on behalf of an idea or group. In the past, that included the flags of Ireland, India, and Ukraine, along with the “Suffrage” flag, the “Children of the American Revolution” flag, and the Lion’s Club flag. Recently, city officials took down the New Hampshire state flag to make room for a “Progress Pride” banner.

What the city would not allow was the flying of a flag promoting women’s rights/girls-only sports or the historic “Appeal to Heaven” Pine Tree Flag. Nashua resident Beth Scaer told the city she wanted to fly the flag to commemorate the anniversary of the Bunker Hill battle, in which several New Hampshire residents took part.

The city refused.

“The flag is not in harmony with the message that the city wishes to express and endorse. Therefore, we must deny your request,” wrote Jennifer L. Deshaies, whose job title in city government is “risk manager.”

Scaer sued, and her cause was taken up by the Institute for Free Speech (IFS). The case went before Magistrate Judge Talesha Saint-Marc last year.

During testimony before Saint-Marc, City Attorney Jonathan Barnes compared flying the Pine Tree flag at City Hall to flying a Nazi flag.

“(The plaintiffs) would have you believe that we can raise the Nazi flag to commemorate Hitler’s birthday. I think that’s totally unreasonable, and it certainly wouldn’t be in the city’s best interests to do that,” Barnes said.

In her report rejecting Scaer’s complaints, Saint-Marc called the flag a “far-right” symbol and noted it was flown by some participants in the Jan. 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol riot.

In fact, the pine tree was a common symbol of New England during the Revolutionary War era. The Pine Tree Flag was adopted as Massachusetts’ state flag for a brief period.

The symbol is also tied to the historic Pine Tree Riot in Weare, N.H., one of the first acts of rebellion leading up to the American Revolution.

As for Jan. 6, free speech advocates note the most commonly flown flag by the rioters was the U.S. flag, which currently flies in front of Nashua City Hall.

McCafferty was unmoved.

The legal issue in dispute is the city’s claim that the so-called Citizen’s Flagpole was never, in fact, a free speech forum, despite the many flags flown by many residents to promote various causes. The city insists every flag was a form of “government speech not regulated by the First Amendment,” as McCafferty ruled.

The Greek national flag flies outside Nashua City Hall on the city flagpole usually reserved for the POW-MIA flag.
(CREDIT: Beth Scaer)

The IFS points out that Nashua Mayor Jim Donchess suddenly (and quietly) ended the city’s flagpole policy soon after the lawsuit was filed. ‘The flagpoles on city hall grounds shall henceforth be exclusively controlled by city government,” Donchess declared.

“The abrupt repeal of Nashua’s flag policy is a tacit admission that the old policy was unconstitutional,” IFS attorney Nathan Ristuccia told NHJournal at the time.

On Monday, Ristuccia told NHJournal there will be an appeal.

“We fully intend to appeal this decision to the First Circuit, where we’ll continue arguing that Nashua’s vague and subjective flag policy created exactly the kind of viewpoint discrimination the Supreme Court has repeatedly found unconstitutional.”

Meanwhile, the city’s flag policy continues to raise questions. Just days before McCafferty’s ruling, the city pulled down the POW-MIA flag that traditionally flies outside City Hall and replaced it with the national flag of Greece. It was, according to a statement from the city, to commemorate Greek Independence Day on March 25.

“I don’t know why they ditched the POW-MIA flag, but I think it is disrespectful,” Scaer told NHJournal.

With spring sports starting soon, the parents suing the Bow School District over their silent protest want a ruling before players hit the field.

On Wednesday, attorneys representing the parents filed a request for an expedited decision on their request for a preliminary injunction keeping the school district from banning future protests. And, their lawyers told the court, if a ruling is delayed so long it keeps these parents sidelined, they will consider that a denial of their request for relief and pursue an appeal.

Anthony Foote, Kyle Fellers, Nicole Foote, and Eldon Rash were forced to end a silent protest — the wearing of pink wristbands marked with “XX” on the sidelines of the high school soccer field — by angry school administrators last September. They were protesting the fact that their girls team was being forced to compete against a biological male. 

After Foote and Kyle Fellers were slapped with “no trespass” orders from the school, orders enforced by the local police, the parents filed a lawsuit against the Bow school district.

The parents are being represented in court by legal nonprofit organization the Institute for Free Speech.

The lawsuit was filed in September, and United States District Court Judge Stephen McAuliffe has already conducted two days of evidentiary hearings and been fully briefed by both sides in the lawsuit, attorneys for the parent’s said.

But the court has yet to act on their request for a preliminary injunction protecting their First Amendment right to bring their wristbands to games during the upcoming spring sports season. In their view, it’s literally a case of justice delayed being justice denied.

“Spring sports season is the last chance for Plaintiffs to silently express their sociopolitical views at a Bow event this school year, and—because one of Plaintiffs’ children is a high-school senior—the last chance to ever express their views at one child’s events,” the motion states.

“Parties completed their post-hearing briefing on Dec. 17. No decision on the injunction has yet been issued. The winter sports season has now ended, and the Bow schools’ spring sports season begins March 24, with games commencing April 14.”

Two biological males who have been playing on girls sports teams are currently suing in federal court to block a New Hampshire state law protecting girls sports. When President Donald Trump issued an executive order doing the same thing, they added the president to their lawsuit.

One of those players, Plymouth High School’s Parker Tirrell, was on the team Bow was competing against during the previous silent protest.

McAuliffe previously overturned the Bow School District ban against the parents attending games and after-school activities. But he has not yet lifted the ban on wristbands or other forms of silent protest.

As the calendar progresses toward the new sports season and the final season for at least one of the girls, Feller, Foote, and the others want a decision now.

“Plaintiffs have been prevented from silently protesting at Bow School District extracurricular events during both the fall and winter sports seasons. Everyday that passes magnifies Plaintiffs’ injury. Unless they receive injunctive relief from this Court, they will not be able to express their viewpoint during the spring sports season as well, including all of one daughter’s remaining games as a high-school student,” the motion states.

“If no ruling occurs by April 14, Plaintiffs will understand this Court to have constructively denied the injunction, and pursue interlocutory appeal of that denial.”

McAuliffe has acknowledged there is nothing bigoted in the parent’s beliefs that biological males who identify as female should not play full-contact sports with biological girls.

“You’re entitled to your viewpoint, a lot of people hold it,” McAuliffe said.

In fact, polls show a solid majority of Americans support protecting girls sports from biological males. But Bow Superintendent Marcy Kelly doesn’t agree, and she told the court that expressing that view is offensive speech that should be banned.

“XX is a pretty well-known anti-trans symbol,” Kelly said on the stand.

Other controversial symbols, such as the LGBTQ “rainbow flag,” would be welcome, however.

“It’s inclusionary, it’s not targeting or harassing anyone,” Kelly said.

The high school soccer referee who reportedly threatened to cancel a Bow girl’s soccer game because parents wore pink “XX” wristbands issued an apology as part of a settlement agreement in the ongoing federal lawsuit.

Soccer dads Kyle Fellers and Anthony Foote, as well as Nicole Foote and Eldon Rash, filed the lawsuit against the Bow School District after they were ordered to remove their pro-girls sports wristbands at a Sept. 17 Bow game against another girl’s team that includes a transgender player. 

Fellers and Anthony Foote were later slapped with no trespass orders by the Bow School District.

Referee Steve Rossetti, who officiated the game, was named in the lawsuit for reportedly threatening to cancel the game if the parents did not remove the wristbands. But Rossetti was dismissed as a defendant this week. As part of an agreement reached with the parents, Rossetti wrote Fellers a letter of apology for swearing at him during a heated exchange.

“I did not choose my words very carefully during our exchange, and I regret any offense I may have caused you,” Rossetti wrote to Fellers. 

According to the original complaint filed in the United States District Court in Concord, Rossetti walked up to Fellers in the school parking lot after the game and let loose on the soccer dad.

“As the spectators and teams left to go to their vehicles, some expressed support for Fellers’ message while others criticized him. Rossetti, the referee who had threatened to cancel the game and make Bow forfeit, called Fellers a ‘f***ing a**hole’ and told him that his daughter would hate him,” the complaint states.

Rossetti works for the New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association as a referee. He is not a school district employee. The lawsuit against SAU 67 and Superintendent Marcy Kelley, is still active, said Del Kolde, a senior attorney for the Institute for Free Speech which is representing Fellers and the other parents. 

“The case is proceeding against Bow School District and the named officials. We are still waiting for the district court to rule on our motion for preliminary injunction,” Kolde told NHJournal.

United States District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe has already overturned Bow’s no trespassing order that prevented Fellers and Foote from going to games and other after school events. But the parents want an injunction to allow them to be able to wear the wristbands and engage in silent protests at future games and school events.

Kelley testified in November that she deems the XX wristbands a problem because they represent an “exclusionary” anti-transgender view that only biological girls should be allowed to play in girl’s sports. Asked if she would ban rainbow wristbands to support LGBTQ+ players, Kelley said she would not.

“It’s inclusionary, it’s not targeting or harassing anyone,” she testified.

Bow’s Sept. 17 game was against the Plymouth High School girl’s team, which includes openly transgender player Parker Tirrell. The week before the Bow game, Tirrell won the right to play on the girl’s team in a lawsuit against New Hampshire’s law banning biological boys from girl’s spots, HB 1205. 

Tirrell played nearly the whole game against Bow on Sept. 17, and there are no reports of Fellers, Foote, or any other parents specifically targeting Tirrell during their wristband wearing, or making any harassing comments directed at Tirrell.