The University of California tells students that using pronouns or names corresponding to a person’s sex assigned at birth rather than their gender identity can constitute sexual harassment. Now, an education watchdog has won an early victory in court to stop it from enforcing its misgendering policy.
The ruling comes amid a First Amendment challenge to University of California policies that classify certain instances of “misgendering” and “deadnaming” as potential harassment.
Training materials cited in Defending Education’s lawsuit included examples involving bathrooms, pronouns, and “deadnaming.”
Launched in June 2025, the university’s SHAPE (Sexual Violence and Harassment, Anti-Discrimination, Prevention and Education) training requires undergraduate, graduate, and professional students across the UC System to complete annual training on sexual violence, harassment, and discrimination. According to the university’s website, students who fail to complete the mandatory training may have an academic hold placed on their records.
“[A] hostile environment may be created when someone demands that others use a particular bathroom that does not correspond to their gender identity or uses the incorrect pronoun,” the training materials state.
Another example states that intentionally using someone’s name from before a gender transition “may be a form of sexual harassment.”
Students found responsible for violating the Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy may face disciplinary action depending on the circumstances.
Defending Education, a national education advocacy organization, sued the University of California in June, arguing that the policy violates students’ First Amendment rights by treating the use of names or pronouns corresponding to a person’s sex assigned at birth as potential harassment.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Fred Slaughter granted the group a preliminary injunction, finding that Defending Education was likely to succeed on its First Amendment challenge to the provisions at issue.
The injunction bars the University of California from enforcing the challenged provisions against Defending Education members who attend UC System schools.
The injunction will stay in place while the case moves toward a final ruling on whether the policy is constitutional.
Nicole Neily, president and founder of Defending Education, called the ruling a victory against what the organization considers compelled speech.
“It is unconstitutional for public universities to compel student speech,” Neily said, adding that Defending Education would “continue to defend this principle in California and other schools across the country as needed.”
When the Daily Signal contacted the University of California Office of the President for comment, the university defended its policy, saying it is intended to address discrimination and harassment rather than constitutionally protected speech.
“The University of California’s Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy is designed to protect members of the university community from discrimination and harassment, not to regulate protected speech,” Stett Holbrook, associate director of strategic and critical communications, said.
“The University takes all reports of harassment seriously, including those involving gender identity, and applies the same legal standards to these reports as it does to all allegations of harassment.”
The spokesperson did not say if the university plans to appeal the ruling.
“While we disagree with the court’s ruling, UC will always seek to foster a welcoming environment that protects both freedom of expression and the fundamental rights of all members of our community,” Holbrook said.
Continue reading...
[ H/T The Daily Signal ]
