NY AG Faces Federal Lawsuit for Allegedly Silencing Parents on Transgender Policies
New York Attorney General Letitia James is now the target of a federal lawsuit claiming her office crossed a constitutional line by threatening to strip elected school board members of their positions if they allowed public comment opposing transgender policies in girls’ locker rooms and school sports.
The suit — brought by school officials and parents working with the Southeastern Legal Foundation — centers on a directive James’ office dispatched earlier this year. That letter warned districts that board members who “demean or stigmatize” LGBTQ+ students, or who permit others to do so during public meetings, could be removed under the state’s Dignity for All Students Act (DASA).
James’ guidance was explicit: comments objecting to “transgender and gender-expansive students’ rights to use facilities, including restrooms and locker rooms, or participate on school athletic teams consistent with their gender identity,” could trigger disciplinary action against elected officials.
Her office further argued that school board meetings constitute “limited public fora” and that officials “may make reasonable, viewpoint-neutral rules governing the content of speech,” including restrictions on remarks deemed to have “discriminatory, harassing, or bullying effects.”
But the plaintiffs contend there was nothing “viewpoint-neutral” about the policy. In practice, they argue, it functioned as a one-sided gag order — shutting down parents, teenage girls, and even school board members who object to biological males accessing girls’ facilities.
Kerry Wachter, chair of the Massapequa Union Free School District board and a lead plaintiff, said the directive was enforced with unmistakable pressure. According to Wachter, officials from James’ office directly informed her that she would be required to cut off speakers who opposed transgender students using girls’ spaces.
“They’re saying if we allow this discussion in our board meetings, she can come in and remove us from the board,” Wachter said. “They want me to stop public comment and stop them from speaking.”
She emphasized that no student was ever identified. “These are girls talking about their own experiences, their own discomfort. We’re not targeting anyone — we’re just listening to them,” she said.
The lawsuit argues that threatening removal for permitting dissenting viewpoints is a blatant violation of the First Amendment — effectively criminalizing disagreement with the state’s ideological agenda on gender identity.
Attorney Kim Hermann of the Southeastern Legal Foundation said the guidance was anything but even-handed. “They’re not saying you can’t talk about this topic,” Hermann said. “They’re saying that nobody can speak in favor of biological sex. If a transgender activist says, ‘Boys belong in girls’ sports,’ they can say whatever they want. But if someone disagrees, they’re silenced.”
The dispute comes amid rising tensions across New York suburbs after the Massapequa school board adopted a policy in September requiring bathrooms and locker rooms to be used according to biological sex. The New York Civil Liberties Union swiftly sued, claiming the policy violated anti-discrimination law.
Since then, students and parents in districts including Rockville Centre and Rotterdam-Mohonasen have described profound discomfort with biological males in girls’ private spaces. Their testimonies — many of them heartfelt, emotional accounts posted online — have gained national attention and reignited debate over whether states can suppress speech that challenges transgender policies.
Public comment sessions, Wachter said, have become pressure points. “Girls are scared to talk,” she noted. “Now even as adults, we’re being told we can’t let them speak.”
Plaintiffs say James’ directive effectively weaponizes state law to intimidate local officials and suppress debate. “When they’re threatening the removal of duly elected school board members for simply allowing public debate, that’s a blatant violation of the First Amendment,” Hermann said.
The complaint also cites James’ warning that even unsuccessful removal proceedings could burden districts with legal costs and distract from their “important work” — language the plaintiffs say was intended to scare school boards into silence.
James’ office has not publicly commented on the lawsuit.
The case represents a rare challenge to the authority of a state attorney general in matters of education policy. It also sets the stage for a critical constitutional battle over whether New York can elevate its gender-identity mandates above the free speech protections guaranteed to parents, students, and elected officials — a fight unfolding as President Donald Trump’s administration continues emphasizing parental rights and viewpoint diversity in public education.