California library violates First Amendment, boots speakers for referring to transgender women as ‘biological men’

August 24, 2023 1 min read

1 Comment

Carrie Robinson, Aaron Terr
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Excerpt: When the government hosts its own programming, it can pick and choose which speakers it wants to feature. But when it opens space such as library meeting rooms for the public to hold their own speaking events, the First Amendment applies. And the First Amendment restrains authorities from discriminating against speakers based on their views or forcing them to use the government’s preferred vocabulary.

That’s why FIRE’s First Amendment alarm bells were ringing when a California public library manager abruptly shut down an event focused on women and girls in sports because the event’s speakers said “male,” “men,” and “biological men” when referring to transgender women.

Click here for link to full article

1 Response

Marc W Turner
Marc W Turner

October 12, 2023

Full article does not exist?

Leave a comment


Also in National Free Speech News & Commentary

The Truth Behind Harvard’s Ideological Imbalance

September 24, 2025 1 min read

Henry F. Haidar 
Harvard Crimson 

Excerpt: Out of all the faculty The Crimson recently surveyed, only one percent described their political beliefs as very conservative. Think about that: someone is three times more likely to get into Harvard than to encounter a conservative faculty member here. 

Much can be — and has been — said in favor of viewpoint diversity in higher education. Yet those decrying the relative lack of conservative faculty overlooks a basic point: The structure of universities themselves lends itself to a professoriate whose politics do not perfectly map on to that of the public writ large. That’s not necessarily a bad thing.

Read More
Dangerous Ideas Needed

September 23, 2025 1 min read

Michael Regnier 
Free The Inquiry, Heterodox Academy 

Excerpt: More than a week after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the shock waves are still rolling through higher education. Kirk’s murder, on a college campus, in the act of open debate, was committed by a killer who reportedly believed that “Some hate can’t be negotiated out.” Although the assassin was a college dropout, his apparent logic was very familiar on campus: some ideas are just “hate,” and the normal rules don’t apply. 

But those of us doing campus programming should look in the mirror before we mention dialogue programs in the same breath as Charlie Kirk. As Redstone points out, Kirk “was pro-life, he supported the police, he questioned systemic racism, and he believed there were only two genders.” These are all squarely mainstream, and in some cases majority, viewpoints in the United States, yet scandalous on many campuses. 

Read More
Commentary: Everyone’s a Free-Speech Hypocrite

September 23, 2025 1 min read

Greg Lukianoff
New York Times

Excerpt: If you’re a free-speech lawyer, you face a choice: Either expect to be disappointed by people of all political stripes — or go crazy. I choose low expectations.

Again and again, political actors preach the importance of free speech, only to reach for the censor’s muzzle when it helps their side. If, like me, you defend free speech as a principle rather than invoke it opportunistically, you get distressingly accustomed to seeing the same people take opposite positions on an issue, sometimes within the space of just a few months.

Read More