Ohio university pays out $400,000 to Christian professor 'for violating his First Amendment Rights'

[ripcord]

Source: Daily Mail

Shawnee State University has agreed to pay $400,000 to professor Nick Meriwether, who sued the school after it punished him for refusing to use a student's preferred pronouns in 2018.

Meriwether, a devout Christian and a professor of philosophy who has taught at Shawnee State for 25-years, sued the school for violating his First Amendment rights.

Shawnee State and Meriwether reached the settlement on Friday after a unanimous ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March 2021 found that the school had violated Meriwether's right to free speech and free exercise of religion.

Controversy began on the first day of Shawnee's second semester in January 2018, when Merewether responded to a student's question by saying 'Yes, sir.'


Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10728699/Shawnee-State-agrees-pay-400k-professor-refused-use-trans-students-preferred-pronouns.html

---

Balancing rights is always fun.

[Walleye]

1. If only Christians would follow their own golden rule

[atreides1]

26. That would be great!

But there are very few actual Christians remaining in this country!

The majority are Neo-Christian...they only follow the tenets that they create...not those espoused by their church!

[LiberalFighter]

2. So the student doesn't have the right to express their gender?

[brooklynite]

9. The student has every right to express their gender and no legal right to require anyone else to.

Gender express is not a protected class under Civil Rights law. Unless respecting gender pronouns was a condition of employment, I don't see how the professor's punishment was justified.

[dpibel]

47. The student wasn't doing the requiring

The university promulgated rules. The prof didn't like them. He had the opportunity, didn't he, to challenge the propriety of the rules? But he chose not to. Wanted to stand up for his Jesus.

There's argument, obvs., over whether the rules were proper. This court weaseled its way into saying they weren't. It's a weakly analyzed case, not unexpectedly considering the composition of the panel.

But many people would think that the rules set by your employer are something right along the lines of "a condition of employment." Your mileage, clearly, is at variance with that proposition.

[brooklynite]

49. "rules set by your employer are something right along the lines of "a condition of employment."

Yes, IF the employer has that right. In the case of Union employees, Management cannot change operating and behavioral rules without modifying the Union contract. In the case of an educational institution, the school may not be able to change the rules for a tenured professor. See: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/black-asian-law-students-call-professor-suspended-offensive-remarks-rcna25187

[dpibel]

50. "may not"

As usual, you're hoping that gets ignored.

[brooklynite]

51. Absent something in the original story saying that they HAD the right...

I'm assuming the Court evaluated the situation and decided the case accordingly.

a unanimous ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

That's going to include some Obama and possibly some Clinton Judges.

[dpibel]

52. One GW Bush, 2 Trumps

It was a three judge panel of the 6th Circuit.

As you'd know if you read the opinion, there's actually no discussion one way or the other as to whether the school had the right, in general, to make rules.

The court determines, to its own satisfaction, that the rule violated the professor's first amendment right to stand up for Jesus.

It's a pretty unconvincing analysis.

But I look forward to your take on it. Here's a link to the opinion:

https://adflegal.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/Meriwether-v-The-Trustees-Shawnee-State-University-6th-Circuit-Opinion.pdf

[dpibel]

55. Just for extra funzies

The author of the opinion, Amul Thapar, spent a couple of his younger years doing pro bono work for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

That, as I'm sure you know, is the group of 1st Amendment purists who brought us Burwell v. Hobby Lobby.

No possible bias to see here folks. Move right along.

[TeddysPerson]

3. Newbie Here

I've been reading DU for a number of years now, and this is the post that finally got me to create an account.

To me, this is like the professor refusing to call a student by their correct name. I suggest that the entire student body start referring to this professor as Prof. Sh*thead. They can answer questions with "yes, Prof. Sh*thead." Students have the same right to free speech. [I'm being half snarky and half serious here.]

I am so over the top tired of people who feel aggrieved when asked to muster up the most basic common decency.

[Jetheels]

7. Welcome!

[Emile]

17. Excellent advice!

[Aristus]

29. Welcome!

[Dr. Strange]

30. Well, except that...

the professor did quite literally offer to refer to the student by their correct name. He just refused to use their preferred pronoun. The student wanted to force the professor to use the pronoun too.

[dpibel]

57. Student wanted prof to follow the rules

is what you meant to say.

As seems news to so very many people on this thread who know all about this case, the school made the rules.

The kid asked the prof to follow the rules.

That's really pretty different from "The student wanted to force the professor to use the pronoun too."

[Dr. Strange]

70. Is it?

The kid asked the prof to follow the rules.

That's really pretty different from "The student wanted to force the professor to use the pronoun too."

Do the rules really say you have to use pronouns? This seems weird to me, because I don't use pronouns with my students. Not because I'm trying to avoid it, but just because I'm never in a situation where I need to. If I need to refer to a specific student, I'll just typically use their name. Do you think my behavior would be violating this school's rules? 'Cause that just seems weird.

[dpibel]

71. Don't be daft

Last edited Thu Apr 21, 2022, 02:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Of course there's no requirement that the good prof use pronouns at all.

In point of fact, Meriwether apparently fancies himself the Jesus-powered John Houseman of Shawnee and teaches his philosophy courses using the Socratic Method.

Thus, he refers to his students as "Mr." or "Ms." (a little startling that he has succumbed to the satanic "Ms." ) and "sir" or "ma'am."

So really, now you mention it, the initial beef was with honorifics and not with pronouns at all.

Be all that as it may, you are clearly a much cooler prof that Meriwether and first-name your students, and good for you.

He doesn't, and therein lies the rub.

[walkingman]

34. It amazes me that issues like these have a $$ value. The issue about pronouns

makes me think "The Lady Doth Protest Too Much". Our world these days seems to have a strange view of priorities.

[lagomorph777]

38. That's actually a really good idea.

They can remind him that if he punishes them, they will sue him.

[IngridsLittleAngel]

58. Had I been in their class

That's exactly what would've happened. You have the right to misgender a trans student? Well, don't be shocked when I call you "Professor Motherfucker" right there in class. Don't be surprised if I decide, hey, I give you a new title and start calling you "janitor" or "alleged professor" or whatever. Because since you're allowed to, and choose to, disrespect others? Don't be surprised when it happens to you.

I try to be a nice and decent person. But I'm sorry, world. It's becoming impossible to do so to people who go out of their way to disrespect others and treat them like shit. If "Professor" here can dish it out? I guess he better be able to take it.

[not fooled]

4. Who paid

for his attorneys?

[NullTuples]

8. Alliance Defending Freedom, a far right religious group that looks for anti-trans fights

[hueymahl]

5. I will always zealously defend first amendment rights.

Whether or not I agree with the message or the speaker. Full stop.

[Jetheels]

6. A university spending a million dollars to protect a students pronoun?

The professor sounds like an asshole, but he offered to just use the students name. The male at birth student still looked like a male but wanted to be called by the gender she identified with. I can see how this could confuse some people. There’s worse things happening in the world besides being misgendered. This entire thing is absurd from all parties involved. IMHO.

[Mosby]

11. The article said she's biologically male.

After class the student, who was born a male but identifies as a female, asked that Merewether refer to them as a woman and with female pronouns.

Merewether said he could not comply with the student's wishes because they violated his religious beliefs that gender is determined from the moment of conception.

Court documents say that the student became belligerent when Meriwether refused to comply, told him he would be fired, and said 'I guess this means I can call you a cu*

[Jetheels]

12. Maybe you didn't research the story as much as I did. I read several different articles about it.

From different news sources, trying to gain as much information I could find.

And I’m sorry but your just not going to get 100 % of the population to believe what you believe and to go along with what you want them to go along with, no matter how correct or courteous you are. And common courtesy is not always common. Just like common sense.

And btw, I’m misgendered all the time, my entire life, irl, and on the phone. I don’t like it but I’m not going to go through lawsuits every time someone gets my gender incorrect.

Yes trans people/ rights are being attacked by the right.
But this story is about a pronoun. A million dollar pronoun.
Your not going to win people over by demanding pronouns from them.
They’re most likely older and set in their ways.
I think these people involved in this story are more concerned with making political statements, and making money.
They don’t really care about much else.
I know a few trans people. They don’t really care about pronouns.

[obamanut2012]

19. "I know a few trans people. They don't really care about pronouns" -- lolololololol

WRONG.

And, it's YOU'RE, not YOUR. At least use proper grammar when you post this anti trans stuff. And yes, it is anti trans stuff, even though you are twisting really hard to try and make it seem like it's not, including implying you are trans when YOU ARE FUCKING NOT. "Oh, I'm misgendered all the time. Oh wait, I'm not Trans, I just have tarns friends, and they don't care about being misgendered haw haw haw."

[Jetheels]

43. I never said I was trans. And btw trans people are not the only people misgendered.

Oh funny, the grammar police can’t even spell. Lol.
Oh so you know my friends? Please, I am speaking from personal experience. Rather than woke politics.
Why don’t you find someone else to troll.
It’s really pointless trying to communicate with someone who clearly has not read about the lawsuit.
Come back to me when you’ve read a few articles on it, and when you gain a little maturity.
Or better yet, don’t.

[IngridsLittleAngel]

63. "woke politics"

Two little words. Just two little words revealed an awful lot on where you stand on issues, especially LGBTQ issues. Two little words leave no doubt to some of us how little you care about human rights or the trans community.

Two little words that come out of the mouths of the right way too often.

[IngridsLittleAngel]

59. "Knowing" a few trans people can mean many things

Do you just "know" them? Are they friends? Are they someone you throw water balloons at and laugh at? "Know" is pretty broad territory there...

If you know us, you may want to listen to us. Because, yes, we do prefer to have proper pronouns used. It does matter. It is a matter of basic respect. If we prefer "she", how hard it is to use "she"? Or even a general "they" or "them"? Most trans women aren't really happy with "he", much like "it".

Also, you know, being so nice and sweet with the bigots and QOP sure has worked well. You know why it hasn't? They view kindness as a sign of weakness. So maybe it's time to quit asking and time to start demanding?

Anyway... If you're just going to dismiss some of our issues and feelings, please don't act like a spokesperson for us? Thanks.

[wontbeoppressed]

13. There is a greater issue. It's about control.

The university didn't spend a million dollars to protect a student's pronouns. It spent a million dollars to protect its ability to make policy and have that policy apply to students and staff.

Example: I worked for a power company. We had a defunct nuclear plant. There was an activist movement to demolish the plant since it was not in use. My power company fought tooth and nail to defeat that activist movement and won. We won the ability to make the decision to do with that defunct plant what the company wanted to do.

Then, we promptly demolished the plant But on the company's terms. Not on the terms of the activists.

It is more about control than about any pronouns.

What's next? The administration cannot bar KKK?

[Jetheels]

15. The professor offered a compromise,

to use any name the student requested instead of titles and pronouns.
But it was rejected.
So I’m not sure who’s trying to control who.

[wontbeoppressed]

16. You missed the lesson in my post about control

It has absolutely nothing to do with pronouns.

My power company could have easily compromised with the activists and said "Okay, we'll take down that nuke plant" because that was the long-term plan anyway. But they did not; felt like they could not. Could not yield any little bit of appearance of decision making being shared outside the corporation. Or that the corporation would yield to pressure from outside.

It is about unquestioned, uncompromisable, and complete control. Without question by anyone. Internal or external.

My power company spent millions to make sure they, and only they, were the ones who would make the decisions. No compromises, no direction from outside actors.

The professor went against policy set by those in power. Compromise or not, he went against their policy. Their dictates. Compromising with him would be as unacceptable to the university management as my power company compromising with the activists.

It gives up a bit of their ability to exercise their power as they feel they should be able to exercise it - without question. That is a threat to them.

[Jetheels]

22. I don't know if the University had any policies written down about addressing students with

Last edited Tue Apr 19, 2022, 07:42 AM - Edit history (1)

their preferred pronouns. This kind of pronoun usage is fairly recent. The professor looks like he’s 50 or 60ish years old. Who knows how long he has worked there. I never heard of anyone being called “they” until maybe 5 years ago. Although I see many people have him her they them etc after their signatures. They most likely are under 30. Most people do not need a pronoun after their name.

I don’t see the comparison between a nuclear power plant and university/ pronouns either.
I don’t see how your comparing activists outside the company you work at who wanted to tell the power company what to do. They are not people who work at the company. Or paid by the company. They are complete outsiders. The professor works at the university, is paid by the university, was hired by the university.
And I don’t see comparing a nuclear power plant that all parties are=gree needs to be torn down to pronoun.
And saying it’s about power and not pronouns? Then you my as well throw out all arguments about every discussion about everything in the entire world because it’s about power.

Don’t you think it absurd that the power company spent millions of dollars fighting the activists, and at the end of the day did exactly what the activists wanted? Because you all wanted the same thing.

And no, nothing is ever beyond question. The only constant is change.
And there are nuances to everything. Things are not black and white.

Tbh, if there’s any similarities between these two stories, I would compare the activists that wanted to shut down the nuclear reactors, with the university. They both wanted to impose their belief system on someone else.

The professor had offered to call the student by her name, sans pronoun, but that was not good enough for the school.

[dpibel]

48. And now you know: they did

The university promulgated rules requiring all U. employees to use students' preferred pronouns.

So the prof was breaking the rules here.

Does that help your analysis.

[obamanut2012]

20. So, the trans student is trying to control the bigoted Christian professor

Oh PLEASE explain how she is doing this?

[FBaggins]

21. How could it be anything else?

We both see a bird and you insist that it's blue yet I see it as red. You can either accept my view or demand that I change it to match your own... or we can agree to disagree and go our separate ways.

In most cases, the third option is the civil one. You want to insist that the Earth is flat? That's fine. You worship the biggest waterfall that you can find? Ok... you do you.

There are some things that are important enough that we say "this is how you must act if you want to remain a part of our society - this is our reality". That's normal - but we can't pretend that it isn't about "control" when we do so. If you grew up in the UK and want to drive on the left side of the road... that's simply too bad. We are indeed controlling you.

[FBaggins]

66. Did you reply to the wrong post?

Nowhere did I say that. My statement doesn't have anything to do with whether the bird is actually either color (or perhaps a third that neither of us perceives).

The question was one of "control", not one of who is correct. If we disagree and one of us is forced to accept the position that we disagreed with... that may be the entirely correct result... but it's still "control".

As I said - how could it be anything else?

[IngridsLittleAngel]

67. You know the old meme about sailing on a rocket right past the point?

Yeah. That's me with my first response. I'm sorry. I completely misread it and had it 180 degrees all backwards.

Again, I'm sorry. I'm self-deleting my first reply to you.

[FBaggins]

68. I don't... but there's no need to apologize

I'm sorry that the subject can be so painful for so many. It makes discussing legal nuances fraught with the potential for unintended offense.

[Jetheels]

24. Would you file a lawsuit against me if I addressed you as obamanut2012?

That’s how.

[obamanut2012]

40. lolz good try

didn't work.

[Jetheels]

42. Hahahahaha do you even know how to read?

Nah didn’t think so.

[dpibel]

53. Wait. Aren't you the person demanding other people know the facts?

The student didn't file a lawsuit.

So now where are we?

[FBaggins]

69. The school didn't have listening devices in the classroom and decide on its own to take action.

The student did initiate the action

Just like filing a lawsuit, the student brought a complaint to a governing administration, which held hearings and made a ruling that included punishment for the action.

That's structurally similar to filing a lawsuit (which the student did threaten to do if the school didn't act).

[dpibel]

72. Quite a stretch

I bet you know the difference between filing a complaint with a university and filing a complaint in court.

It's a pretty big difference, and I think it's beneath your dignity to pretend that "structurally similar" actually means anything here.

Also, to be punctilious: The student threatened to retain counsel when the university did not respond adequately (in the student's opinion) to the problem. As I'm sure you know, there's a world of difference between "retain counsel" and "threaten to file a lawsuit."

As in, you can retain counsel to act on your behalf vis a vis the university and its administration. That is not, in fact, filing a suit or threatening to.

And let us all remember: The person who actually did file suit was Prof Meriwether.

[IngridsLittleAngel]

60. Of course we are

Our existence and the fact we want human respect and our rights upheld somehow brings great harm to little snowflake bigots. The fact we breathe causes them great pain and suffering. So, goddamnit, how dare we expect to have our chosen names or pronouns used, or expect to be treated like a human being, when we're 0.5/5 of a person or whatever?

[obamanut2012]

18. "There's worse things happening in the world besides being misgendered"

And here we have DU on trans issues in a nutshell.

[IngridsLittleAngel]

61. Hey, we're only 0.6% of the population or whatever

Such a small minority.. Such a small group. But, damnit, we're in their way.. We drag them down. We waste their time. Looking after us and protecting us is a losing strategy. Keep our powder dry! The numbers!

I don't get it. Especially when I thought the purpose of the Democratic party was to protect minorities, especially vulnerable ones. And who the hell is more vulnerable here in 2022 than the trans community, where every single day (even here), it feels like the guns are aimed at us?

We didn't start this fight. We never do. It's the QOP. Every damned time. We ask for basic human rights. We ask for respect. We ask for the same rights others enjoy (when rights don't apply to everyone, people, they're called privileges.) Yet, damnit, it's all the fault of uppity trans people who are trying to defend themselves against the QOP onslaught.

Amazing how so many people who insist they'll never agree with Republiqans on anything... suddenly are fine to reach across the aisle on "compromising" us.

Trans issues on DU in a nutshell. Six months after "Handful of DUers". 3 weeks after our very president made the statements he did on Trans Day of Visibility...

[not fooled]

14. OK so the judge

would agree that universities can't silence profs for e.g. teaching the 1619 Project or something else conservative donors might not like?

[FBaggins]

23. They wouldn't have much choice. That is what current court precedent says

A university could "silence" the professor if she were hired to teach BCE history of Mesopotamia and instead spent her days teaching the 1619 project. But if the class is on "The American Founding" they could no so restrict her.

OTOH - if she were a high school teacher - they would have more ability to dictate her content.

[dpibel]

54. Any evidence this guy was teaching "Trans people and pronouns"?

He was teaching some sort of philosophy class. The school made a rule that staff had to use students' preferred pronouns. He chose not to.

That's awfully close to your example where the university could "silence" the professor.

[FBaggins]

65. The university would be in a better position if he was

University professors have more "free speech" rights than high school teachers do. But the university would have far more ability to influence his conversation if that were the actual course name.

That's awfully close to your example where the university could "silence" the professor.

Not at all. The school could discipline the professor for failing to teach the subject he was hired to teach, but that doesn't mean "you can only say what we pay you to say"... it means "we can discipline you if you're an Econ professor who never teaches Econ". And Econ professor absolutely could spend a day discussing the economics of slavery during the early years of our country's history.

The school made a rule that staff had to use students' preferred pronouns. He chose not to.

Right - and that rule had nothing to do with the course that he was paid to teach. If he was a geography professor and decided to teach a flat earth perspective... they could restrict that.

[Novara]

25. So this bigot got a nice payout for being a bigot.

[Oneironaut]

27. The professor was being an asshole.

The “compromise” seemed fine to me. However, of course he had to have passive-aggressive “oopsies,” e.g. “Thanks, SIRRR! I mean, ummm, (whispers) ma’am.”

Trans people deal with this shit every day - from the outside world and our own families, and even people here are telling us to just take it in stride. No big deal, right?

We have an empathy crisis in this country. Just because you aren’t forced to be a decent person and an empathic person doesn’t mean you’re off the hook.

[rkleinberger]

36. Why isn't the student then suing the professor and the school for settling?

[Oneironaut]

45. Could you rephrase that? I don't understand.

[IngridsLittleAngel]

62. Yes we do

Empathy has been lacking and dying in this country for decades... But sure seems to have taken severe steps in the wrong direction thanks to a few key people - namely, Newt "Contract ON America" Gingrich, Rush "Excrement in Broadcasting" Limbaugh, and of course Tronald "Fuck your safe space!" Jrump. I don't know how much more this society can take, honestly.

So many people here are blind to what we do face... every frigging day. Society. Our own families. Our so-called "friends". Then we come here and... see more. Get told to shut up. Get told to take it in stride. No big deal. Quit asking for ponies. Etc... Again, more lack of empathy.

Sometimes tells me the cishets here wouldn't much like it if they faced as much shit as we do.

[SomewhereInTheMiddle]

28. Who was violating the First Amendment?

Discussing this last night, a thought occurred to me. As a professor at a state university could the student not have argued that the professor – acting as a state agent – was promulgating one particular religion in that classroom? This would be a violation of the First Amendment.

Federal and state employees, acting in their official capacity, have limits on their behavior and speech. The same behavior and speech that may be allowed when not in their official capacity. Or at least that is my limited understanding from training received when I was a professor at various state and federal institutions. As a professor at a private institution those limits do not apply because I am not a state agent.

I think that would have been the tactic I would have suggested to the student seeking redress. The professor made the argument that his First Amendment rights were violated without taking into account he was in violation of the same amendment by breaching the separation of church and state in his state-owned classroom.

[Novara]

33. Right. You have a right to your religion and I have a right to be free of your religion.

And no, America isn't a "christian" country.That's the whole point of the Establishment Clause.

[Jedi Guy]

39. That's not the core issue here, though.

As another response pointed out, the professor wasn't using his podium to proselytize or similar, so that wouldn't have been at issue here.

You're right that federal and state employees have limits on their speech. However, the core issue here was that the student and the university were attempting to compel the use of desired speech as opposed to proscribing undesired speech. That's a crucial difference.

Compelling certain speech is just as problematic as banning certain speech with regard to the First Amendment. Do we want to set the precedent that the state can make you say certain things? I most certainly don't.

[rkleinberger]

35. So why cannot the student sue the Professor directly for violating their freedom of expression....

and inflicting emotional distress? I don't get why this never occurs.

[andym]

37. The case was decided correctly. Free speech rights in the US are strong

The university can encourage, but not force a professor to call a student in their preferred way. Keep in mind that the US DOES NOT even have hate speech laws because the courts have ruled that preventing hate speech violates the Constitution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech#:~:text=The%20United%20States%20does%20not,Amendment%20to%20the%20U.S.%20Constitution.

The student could of course call the professor anything they want.

[melm00se]

41. A few comments

1. the department head screwed the pooch for the school.

Comments like

Christians are “primarily motivated out of fear” and should be “banned from teaching courses
regarding that religion.”

“presence of religion in higher education is counterproductive.”

are clearly discriminatory on the basis of religion which is a protected class.

See page 4 of the opinion.

2. The university provost didn't help the school's case either.

The Shawnee State faculty union filed a grievance against the university on behalf of Meriweather and at the hearing the provost "repeatedly interrupted the representative and made clear that he would not discuss the academic freedom and religious discrimination aspects of the case". Additionally the provost "openly laughed" and was "so hostile that the union representative “was not able to present the grievance.”" Not surprisingly, the provost denied the grievance. See page 8 of the ruling.

3. Neither did the Shawnee State’s Labor Relations Director and General Counsel:

The officials agreed with the union that Meriwether’s conduct had not “created a hostile
educational environment.”...But they recommended ruling against Meriwether anyway.

So, in essence, they agreed that Meriweather did not create a hostile environment but was going to punished for it anyway.

HUH???

I would suggest picking up the ruling at page 10 which details prior precedent for 1st Amendment cases.

To be fair, the University did raise some counter-arguments but it appears that whoever did this failed basic civics classes as it relates to the roles of the Supreme Court and inferior courts (or, in other words, who runs the show when it comes to rulings).

I really would suggest that anyone interested in commenting on this case actually read the ruling it is only 32 pages long and is fairly easy to read.

https://adflegal.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/Meriwether-v-The-Trustees-Shawnee-State-University-6th-Circuit-Opinion.pdf

But I doubt most will because it runs counter to their own sincerely held beliefs and because Prof. Meriweather is a Christian he is not and should not be afforded any constitutional protection as it does not fit into their narrative.

[dpibel]

56. The statements you quote were not proven

It's an easy trap to fall into. Because of the procedural posture of the case, the court was obligated to accept all allegations in the plaintiif's complaint as true.

But there wasn't a trial. Nobody from the school got to say, "I didn't say that" or "He must have misunderstood."

So your certitude about what actually happened may be misplaced.

[dpibel]

46. Outcome-oriented opinion

Last edited Thu Apr 21, 2022, 03:56 AM - Edit history (1)

For those who find the recitation of facts here damning, please do take into account that this is a review of a summary dismissal, not of a trial.

As stated in the opinion, the standard of review requires the appellate court to accept as true all facts in the complaint.

So when you're reading about how awful and snotty and mean and stuff the university Nazis were, keep in mind that you're getting precisely the story the plaintiff told, without rebuttal from the defendants.

IOW, the statement of facts here is not based on testimony. It's based on what Meriwether said in his complaint. No surprise then, that he seems a terribly victimized True Believer.

Not going to do a blow-by-blow. The principle defect in this opinion is the court's pretense that Meriwether's refusal to use the student's preferred pronouns was, in fact, communicative, pedagogical speech, associated with a matter of important public consequence.

But there's no indication of any kind that the subject matter of the course had anything to do with gender identity. Thus, the only thing being communicated, or subject to discussion was "I don't wanna use your pronouns."

The case could go either way, which is frequently the nature of this type of dispute.

But for those in this thread pretending that this was an obvious slam-dunk for Meriwether, I think you're really not quite up with what's going in in the opinion.

And, I must point out: The panel was one judge appointed by Shrub and two appointed by Trump. And, sure, even a blind pig sometimes finds a truffle.

This is not. It's a pretty swell illustration of a court deciding what the outcome is and then figuring out why.