Key Takeaways:
- A federal judge in Colorado won’t remove himself from a transgender-related case.
- The case involvesUniversity of Wyoming volleyball players suing over a male athlete on a women’s team.
- Plaintiffs claim the judge’s pronoun rules bias the case and chill free speech.
- They plan to appeal to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
A federal judge in Colorado is at the center of a heated debate over transgender rights and free speech. Judge S. Kato Crews refused to step down from a case involving University of Wyoming volleyball players. These players are suing the Mountain West Conference for allowing a male athlete to join a women’s team.
The Pronoun Rule
Judge Crews has a courtroom rule requiring everyone to use “proper” pronouns. This means calling individuals by the pronouns they prefer, like using “she/her” for someone who identifies as female. Critics say this rule pressures people to accept a certain ideology.
In this case, the judge applied this rule to Blaire Fleming, a male athlete who identifies as female and plays on the San Jose State women’s volleyball team. However, Judge Crews told the plaintiffs early on that they didn’t have to use “she/her” for Fleming. He asked them to remain professional and respectful.
Bias and Free Speech Concerns
The plaintiffs, who include the University of Wyoming volleyball team, believe Judge Crews’ rule shows bias. They argue that his stance on pronouns suggests he supports transgender advocacy, which could influence the case unfairly.
Their lawyer claims the rule is unconstitutional, even if it’s not strictly enforced. The lawyer argues that it creates a “chilling effect” on free speech. This means people might feel afraid to speak freely in court for fear of breaking the judge’s rules.
What’s at Stake?
The plaintiffs point out several legal issues. They claim the judge’s rule could lead to:
- Viewpoint Discrimination: Punishing people for not using preferred pronouns could silence certain viewpoints.
- Prior Restraint: Forcing people to use specific words might restrict free speech before it even happens.
- Lack of Neutrality: A judge’s personal beliefs should not influence courtroom rules, they argue.
The Bigger Picture
This case highlights a growing debate over transgender rights and free speech. Advocates for transgender individuals argue that using preferred pronouns is a matter of respect and equality. Critics, however, worry about the impact on free speech and fairness in sports.
Judge Crews defends his rule, saying courts often use preferred pronouns as a courtesy. He insists his use of “she/her” for Fleming doesn’t mean he has already decided the case.
But the plaintiffs aren’t convinced. They believe the judge’s rule creates an unfair environment. They’ve filed an appeal to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, hoping a higher court will rule differently.
What’s Next?
The case is far from over. If the 10th Circuit agrees with the plaintiffs, Judge Crews could be removed from the case. This would set a precedent for how judges handle transgender-related cases in the future.
For now, the debate over pronouns, bias, and free speech continues. This case could have far-reaching implications for how courts balance respect for individuals with the rights of those who disagree.