(GRANTS PASS, OR) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled in favor of two former Grants Pass educators who alleged they were wrongfully terminated for expressing opposition to their school district’s gender identity policies. In a significant development, the court granted summary judgment to Rachel Sager and Katie Medart, determining that their constitutional rights may have been violated, and doing so without requiring the case to proceed to trial.
Sager and Medart, both former employees of the Grants Pass School District, filed suit after being placed on administrative leave and ultimately removed from their positions in 2021. The educators had launched a social media campaign called “I Resolve,” which advocated for alternative approaches to gender identity accommodations in schools. Their position included support for parental notification policies and gender-specific restrooms, among other proposals that diverged from the district’s practices regarding transgender and nonbinary students.
The district’s response to the campaign included disciplinary action against both educators, which Sager and Medart argued was a retaliatory violation of their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Specifically, their legal challenge claimed that the school district’s actions infringed upon their freedom of speech and right to equal protection under the law.
In its decision, the Ninth Circuit found that the plaintiffs had sufficiently demonstrated their right to express personal opinions on public policy matters without facing employment consequences, especially when those views were shared outside the scope of their official duties and on their own time. The court concluded that the school district’s actions constituted a potential violation of the Equal Protection Clause, siding with the educators’ argument that they were treated differently because of their viewpoint.
The summary judgment issued by the court means that this decision was reached based on legal arguments and evidence submitted by both parties, without proceeding to a jury trial. It reflects the appellate court’s determination that the facts of the case, even when viewed in the light most favorable to the district, did not justify further litigation on the claims at issue.
While not all of the plaintiffs’ claims were upheld in full, the ruling marks a notable victory in the ongoing debate over the intersection of employee speech rights and school district policies related to gender identity. The court’s decision underscores the principle that public employees retain certain constitutional protections when speaking on matters of public concern, particularly in a non-professional capacity.
The Grants Pass School District has not yet announced whether it will appeal the ruling or seek a review by a higher court. The case has drawn national attention as part of broader legal and political discussions surrounding educational policy, free speech, and LGBTQ+ student rights in public schools.
As the legal proceedings continue to unfold, the decision by the Ninth Circuit serves as a reminder of the complex and often contentious balance between institutional policy enforcement and individual rights within the public education system.