OPINION:
Earlier this month, a federal appeals court ruled 2-1 that Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland did not violate a substitute teacher’s First Amendment rights by requiring her to use a transgender student’s preferred pronouns.
The case involved a teacher who, guided by her sincerely held religious beliefs, refused to affirm what she saw as a denial of biological reality. The majority opinion dismissed her claims, but the dissent got it right: This is a clear infringement on free speech and religious exercise. If this case reaches the Supreme Court, then the teacher should prevail, as the school’s policy compels speech that violates her conscience and faith.
The legal argument is straightforward and rooted in the First Amendment’s protections against compelled speech. The government cannot force individuals to express messages they disagree with, especially when those messages conflict with religious convictions.
In West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), the Supreme Court struck down a requirement for students to salute the flag, declaring that “no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.”
Here, the school district demanded that the teacher mouth words that contradicted her belief in God’s creation of male and female as immutable. This requirement is ideological coercion. The school’s interest in creating an “inclusive” environment doesn’t override her rights, particularly since alternatives, such as using the student’s last name, could achieve the same goal without forcing her to lie.
By punishing her refusal, the district violated her free exercise rights under the First Amendment, as reinforced by cases such as Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993) and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (2021), which apply strict scrutiny to burdens on religious practice when laws are not neutral or generally applicable. The pronoun policy targets religious objections to gender ideology, failing that test.
Government schools trample not only on parents’ and students’ rights. They violate teachers’ rights too. The system operates as a cult, worshipping at the altar of woke ideology. It exists to indoctrinate children into a socialist worldview, using teachers as tools to push the agenda.
When a teacher steps out of line, the heavy hand of government descends to enforce compliance with gender ideology that rejects basic biological reality. It’s no surprise that students struggle with reading and math. The system confuses them by prioritizing gender fluidity over fundamental truths.
Teachers deserve better options, but the one-size-fits-all government school system functions as a monopsony, or a monopoly in the labor market. With few alternatives, educators remain trapped, powerless against arbitrary mandates. The employer holds all the leverage, leaving teachers with no real recourse when their rights are steamrolled.
This monopoly breeds inefficiency. Without competition, school systems have zero incentive to spend taxpayer dollars wisely. Extra funds balloon administrative bloat instead of reaching classrooms or boosting teacher pay.
School choice changes that dynamic. Competition forces districts to redirect resources toward educators, creating a professional environment that empowers employees and keeps them satisfied. When families can vote with their feet, schools must prioritize what matters: attracting and retaining quality staff through better conditions and respect for individual beliefs.
Good teachers must recognize that the system cares nothing for them either. The bureaucracy views them as interchangeable cogs in the indoctrination machine. Those educators should opt out of unions that prioritize politics over paychecks and join alternatives such as the Teacher Freedom Alliance, free of charge. A mass teacher exodus would finally pressure union bosses to refocus on academics rather than activism.
The violations extend beyond teachers. Government schools also infringe on children’s and families’ First Amendment rights. Religious families are forced to fund a system incapable of providing faith-based education for their children. In reality, these supposedly nonreligious public schools act as anti-religious institutions, riddled with bias against traditional beliefs.
The compulsory setup amounts to compelled government speech, where families subsidize and send children to institutions that promote ideologies hostile to their own.
School choice stands as the only path forward to honor everyone’s rights. It ends the imposition of one ideology on other people’s children, allowing families to select education aligned with their values, whether religious, secular or otherwise. Competition elevates quality, respects diversity and dismantles the monopoly’s stranglehold.
• Corey DeAngelis is a senior fellow at Americans for Fair Treatment and a visiting fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.