West Point Public Schools had to pay $575,000 due to their infringement of a teacher’s First Amendment Rights!
The issue of compelled speech in public schools is on the rise, especially with growing demands around gender identity and pronoun usage. This issue was notably highlighted in Peter Vlaming v. West Point Public Schools, where a Virginia teacher was fired for refusing to use a transgender student’s preferred pronouns. The subsequent lawsuit argued that this violated his First Amendment rights, as the government cannot force an individual to express beliefs contrary to their own. The settlement in favor of Vlaming underscores the importance of protecting free speech, especially in the context of religious beliefs.
Compelled speech
—forcing individuals to speak against their beliefs—has been a deeply controversial issue and is unconstitutional according to longstanding legal principles. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled consistently against compelled speech in landmark cases. One of the most prominent is West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), where the Court held that compelling students to salute the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance violated their First Amendment rights. Justice Robert Jackson’s words in this case ring just as true today: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.”
Compelling speech is a direct affront to the freedoms our Constitution guarantees, particularly in education. The role of public schools is to foster an environment of learning, not one where students or teachers are coerced into adopting government-approved viewpoints.
The case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018) further reaffirmed this principle in the context of religious freedom, ruling that individuals cannot be forced by the state to express messages they disagree with on religious grounds. Applying this logic to Michigan schools, any policy that forces teachers or students to use specific pronouns or espouse specific beliefs about gender may be similarly unconstitutional, exposing schools to litigation.
Michigan schools must remain vigilant in respecting constitutional protections of free speech and religious liberty. Enforcing policies that compel speech or mandate ideological conformity risks legal challenges that could have profound financial and reputational consequences. Michigan educators and policymakers should heed the lessons from cases like Vlaming and Barnette to avoid the dangerous territory of compelled speech. As Justice Thomas has often emphasized, “the Constitution protects the individual’s right to dissent from orthodoxy, and it is this diversity of thought that underpins a free society.”
Schools must focus on education, not ideological enforcement, and ensure that all voices—teachers and students alike—are respected. The First Amendment demands nothing less.
Comments