Two female students filed a federal lawsuit on Friday seeking to vindicate their constitutional right to free speech.
The two women, Selene Cerankosky and Maria Arcara, are third-year law students at Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University and are being represented by attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom.
They are a part of a “Scalia Law ‘25” GroupMe chat. In the chat, a male student sent a message informing the group that he had submitted a proposal to add feminine hygiene products to male restrooms.
Cerankosky responded to the student’s message, saying that if women accessed male restrooms, she believed that men would seek to access private female spaces. Arcara concurred with Cerankosky’s message and concerns. The male student then accused them of bigotry and complained to the university’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Office.
Two weeks later, the school issued no-contact orders prohibiting the young women from contacting the other male student and accused them of violating the school’s policy against “sexual harassment.”
As ADF’s attorney’s explain, “The school unlawfully used its Title IX and Office of Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion sexual harassment policy against the students because of their religious beliefs and privacy concerns.”
This brings us to the young women’s lawsuit.
“Universities – including law schools – must preserve the marketplace of ideas for all in order to encourage civil discourse for our future attorneys, politicians, judges, and leaders,” said ADF Senior Counsel Tyson Langhofer, director of the ADF Center for Academic Freedom.
George Mason’s policy is far too subjective and allows university officials to punish students simply because their opinions about hotly debated social issues don’t align with their own. We are urging the court to restore the students’ First Amendment rights and order George Mason to stop enforcing its policy against protected expression.
It’s somewhat ironic that this incident occurred at the Antonin Scalia Law School. Former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away in 2015, was one of the high court’s most eloquent defenders of free speech.
He was committed to Originalism, the idea that the Constitution’s terms should be interpreted according to their original meaning.
Justice Scalia famously authored the 5-4 decision in Texas v. Johnson, holding that burning the American flag was protected speech under the First Amendment.
“You should be in no doubt that, patriotic conservative that I am, I detest the burning of the nation’s flag – and if I were king I would make it a crime,” Justice Scalia said during a speech he gave in 2012.
“But as I understand the First Amendment, it guarantees the right to express contempt for the government, the Congress, the Supreme Court, even the nation and the nation’s flag. … Originalism prevents judges, conservatives and liberals alike, from judging according to their desires.”
Likewise, the Constitution protects everyone’s freedom to speak their mind – even if that speech hurts someone’s feelings or goes against the grain of entrenched ideologies at supposedly prestigious law schools.
As the women’s lawsuit says,
Three cheers for Selene Cerankosky and Maria Arcara; we commend their courage and willingness to defend their First Amendment rights.
Hopefully in the process of upholding their rights, they can teach their law school a lesson on the importance of free speech.
The case is Cerankosky v. Washington.
Related articles and resources:
Teacher Wrongly Fired for Refusing to Use ‘Preferred Pronouns’ Wins $575,000
Free Speech Victory for Virginia Teacher Fired Over ‘Transgender’ Pronoun Policy
Landmark Victory for Free Speech at the U.S. Supreme Court
Photo from Getty Images.
The post Female Law Students Punished for Objecting to Men in Women’s Restrooms, File Lawsuit appeared first on Daily Citizen.
Daily Citizen