Federal Appeals Court Upholds Termination of Oregon School Counselor Over Gender-Themed Books

💛 A quick favor, if you've got a second.

We're really happy that you chose to read one of our stories and sincerely hope you'll stick around to read more. We took our paywall down — for now — but that won't last forever, and when the gate goes back up, we'd love for you to already be on the inside.

It's free. So please enter your email here and don't forget to like and follow us on all of your favorite Social Media platforms!

Share this story:


✉️ Email


💬 Text

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this week that an Oregon school counselor fired over displaying books addressing gender topics in his office did not have constitutional First Amendment protections for that conduct. The panel’s 2-1 decision upheld the termination of Roderick E. Theis II, who had worked as an education specialist with Oregon’s InterMountain Education Service District for over 15 years, according to court filings reviewed by Fox News Digital.

Theis displayed three books in his offices during meetings with middle school students: “He is He,” “She is She,” and “Johnny the Walrus,” a children’s book written by conservative commentator Matt Walsh that addresses transgender themes. After the school district determined the displays constituted a “bias incident,” administrators ordered removal of the materials or face termination. Though a federal judge initially granted a partial protective order permitting the books’ display when students were absent, investigations later revealed Theis had provided the books to students who requested them.

The majority ruling by Circuit Judge John B. Owens determined that Theis’s speech qualified as government speech because he exercised it while performing official duties in school settings with students present. “His speech occurred in the course of those responsibilities and cannot be meaningfully separated from them,” Owens wrote, placing the conduct outside First Amendment protections.

Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke’s dissenting opinion criticized the decision, arguing the books constituted personal office decorations rather than official speech. VanDyke questioned whether schools could selectively permit certain political decorations while prohibiting others based on ideological alignment.

Share this story:


✉️ Email


💬 Text