Judge blocks University of California from punishing conservative group for misgendering

Overview

Updated Yesterday

A federal judge has temporarily stopped the University of California from punishing members of a conservative advocacy group who use names and pronouns that don't match a transgender person's chosen identity. The preliminary injunction, issued Sept. 20, found UC's anti-harassment policy likely violates the First Amendment by compelling speech.

The order protects only members of Defending Education while its lawsuit progresses. It doesn't strike down the policy for other students, and UC can still act against abusive harassment, including repeated taunting.

Why it matters

If the ruling becomes permanent, public universities may lose the ability to treat misgendering as harassment, reshaping transgender policy across higher education.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

2.2%

UC students who are transgender or nonbinary

About 6,600 of 301,000 students per fall 2025 records.

301,000

Total UC student enrollment

All campuses, fall 2025.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

People Involved

Fred W. Slaughter

U.S. District Judge, Central District of California

Presiding over the case

Nicole Neily

President of Defending Education

Celebrated the ruling

Rachel Zaentz

Spokesperson for the University of California

Disagrees with the ruling

Organizations Involved

Defending Education

Conservative education advocacy group

Plaintiff in the lawsuit

Nonprofit group that offers free membership and challenges university policies it sees as infringing free speech.

University of California

Public university system

Defendant in the lawsuit

System of 10 campuses serving about 301,000 students across California.

Timeline

June 2026 September 2026

2 events Latest: Yesterday

September 2026
Preliminary injunction issued
Latest Legal

Judge Fred W. Slaughter blocks UC from punishing Defending Education members for using birth names and pronouns, finding the policy likely violates free speech.
Yesterday
June 2026
Defending Education files lawsuit against UC
Legal

The group challenges UC's Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy, arguing the misgendering prohibition compels speech and violates the First Amendment.
June 18th, 2026

Scenarios

Injunction becomes permanent after trial

Possible Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: First Amendment scholars and civil liberties groups

The case proceeds to a full merits hearing. Judge Slaughter makes permanent his finding that UC's policy unconstitutionally compels speech. UC either stops enforcing the misgendering provision or changes it to be narrower.

UC revises its policy to avoid conflict

Possible Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: University administrators and higher education policy analysts

To minimize legal exposure, UC amends its Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy—removing or narrowing the misgendering section—before the trial concludes. The lawsuit becomes moot.

Higher courts step in before final ruling

Possible Resolves by Q2 2028

Discussed by: Constitutional law observers and appellate attorneys

Either side appeals the preliminary injunction, or the case is fast-tracked to the Ninth Circuit or Supreme Court. A higher court weighs in on whether misgendering constitutes constitutionally protectable speech, setting national precedent.

Historical Context

2 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

1989

Doe v. University of Michigan (1989)

The University of Michigan adopted a speech code prohibiting discriminatory and harassing speech based on race, ethnicity, and other categories. A psychology graduate student challenged it after fear of punishment for discussing theories about race.

Then

A federal judge struck down the code as overbroad and vaguely defined, saying it infringed protected speech.

Now

The ruling guided courts to reject broad campus speech codes that suppress protected expression, setting a precedent that public universities must narrowly tailor harassment policies.

Why this matters now

Like Michigan's code, UC's policy treats certain speech (misgendering) as harassment. The injunction applies the same First Amendment framework to a modern gender-identity dispute.

2021

Meriwether v. Hartop (2021)

Nicholas Meriwether, a professor at Shawnee State University, refused to use a transgender student's preferred pronouns, citing religious beliefs. The university disciplined him.

Then

The Sixth Circuit ruled that the professor's refusal was protected speech under the First Amendment, ordering the university to allow him to keep his beliefs.

Now

The case established that forcing someone to use pronouns inconsistent with their beliefs can be compelled speech, a principle now applied to students.

Why this matters now

The UC injunction extends the same principle to students, blocking the university from punishing those who decline to use preferred pronouns or names.