Willey v. Sweetwater Cnty. Sch. Dist. No 1 Bd. of Trs.
| Docket Number | 23-CV-069-SWS |
| Decision Date | 30 June 2023 |
| Parties | ASHLEY WILLEY and SEAN WILLEY, Plaintiffs, v. SWEETWATER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 BOARD OF TRUSTEES, KELLY MCGOVERN, NICOLE BOLTON, KAYCIARNOLDI, and BRYANT BLAKE, Defendants, |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Wyoming |
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
This matter comes before the Court on the Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 6) (the “Motion”) filed by Plaintiffs Ashley Willey and Sean Willey (collectively “Plaintiffs” or the “Willeys”). Defendants Sweetwater County School District No. 1 (“SCSD”) Board of Trustees; Kelly McGovern, SCSD Superintendent (“Ms. McGovern”) Nicole Bolton, SCSD Assistant Superintendent and Human Resource Director (“Ms. Bolton”); Kay ci Amoldi SCSD Director of Student Services (“Ms. Amoldi”) and Bryant Blake, Principal at Black Butte High School (“Principal Blake”) (collectively “Defendants” or the “District”[1]) were served notice of the Motion and provided supporting documentation on April 24, 2023, via electronic mail. (See ECF No. 13.) The District responded (ECF No. 16), and the Willeys replied (ECF No. 21). Both parties submitted affidavits and other evidence in support of their positions. Having considered the motion and the parties' submissions in support thereof, reviewed the record, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court finds the motion for a preliminary injunction must be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
The thorny Constitutional issues in this case revolve around a policy adopted by the District at the beginning of the 2022-23 school year. The policy directed how school district personnel are required to handle a student's request to be called by a preferred or chosen name and/or pronoun, including if contrary to their given legal name or gender. (ECF No. 1 at 68-69.) In relevant part, the policy provides that district personnel Id. at 68. District personnel are advised that “violations of this procedure may constitute discrimination based on sex, and may result in discipline.” Id. at 69. As detailed below, the claims presented in this case raise issues concerning the entitlement of a parent to be informed of a student's request under this policy as well as the parents “right” to override the policy. Issues are also raised as to an employee's obligation to adhere to the policy despite religious conflicts.
On April 20,2023, the Willeys filed their Complaint (ECF No. 1) alleging violations of numerous constitutional rights through 42 U.S.C. § 1983.[2] Specifically, the Willeys allege as applied this policy violates: (1) their Fourteenth Amendment fundamental substantive due process right to direct the upbringing of their children; (2) their Fourteenth Amendment fundamental substantive due process right to familial privacy; and (3) their First Amendment right to free exercise of religion (collectively the “Joint Claims”). Additionally, in her capacity as a teacher for the District, Plaintiff Ashley Willey (“Mrs. Willey”) alleges the Policy violates: (1) her First Amendment right to free exercise of religion; and (2) her First Amendment right to free speech (collectively the “Individual Claims”).
On April 21, 2023, the Willeys filed the instant motion seeking a preliminary injunction enjoining the District from enforcing and implementing this policy. (See ECF No. 6.) Specifically, they ask the Court to enjoin the Defendants from: (1) referring to one of their children by any name other than their legal birth name or by pronouns inconsistent with their birth sex without their prior written consent; and (2) having private discussions with any of their children regarding mental health issues without their prior written consent. (See ECF No. 6 at 2.). Approaching the issues from her angle as a teacher, Mrs. Willey seeks an injunction enjoining Defendants from: (1) compelling her to refer to any student by any name other than his or her legal name or by any pronouns other than those “appropriate for his or her sex;” (2) compelling her to refrain from informing parents of their child's assertion of a “discordant gender identity and request for social transitioning” absent evidence of an investigation by child protective services regarding alleged abuse; and (3) compelling her to deceive parents by referring to any child by one set of names and pronouns at school and another set of names and pronouns in conversations with parents. (Id. at 2-3.)
The Willeys are married and reside in Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Together, the Willeys are the parents of four children that attend schools within the Sweetwater County School District. In addition, Mrs. Willey is the parent and guardian of a 16-y ear-old that attends Black Butte High School (the “Student”)[3], which is part of the SCSD. While Mrs. Willey claims to be the mother and sole legal guardian of the Student (ECF No. 1 ¶ ll)[4], the District refutes this allegation, claiming the Student's biological father maintains a parental role in the Student's life (see ECF No. 16 at 3). In addition, Mrs. Willey is employed as a special education math teacher in the District. (ECF No. 1 ¶ 13.)
The Willeys allege the Student has been diagnosed with ADHD, PTSD, and is under the care of a private counselor. (Id. ¶¶ 19-22.) The Student is also under an Accommodation Plan under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. (ECF No. 1 at 5.) At the beginning of the 2021-22 school year, despite being bom biologically female, the Student told teachers at Black Butte High School that the Student wanted to be treated as a male and be referred to by male pronouns. (Id. ¶ 25.) The Willeys were unaware of the Student's request at that time, and were not informed or advised of the Student's request. (Id.) On March 29,2022, while participating in a district-wide training, Mrs. Willey asserts that for the first time she discovered-when two of the Student's teachers at Black Butte disclosed-that the Student was being referred to by a male name and male pronouns at school, and had been for the entire school year. (ECF No. 1 ¶¶s 27-32.) Upon learning this Mrs. Willey informed the Student that the Student was “too young to make such decisions” and the conduct at school needed to stop. (Id. ¶ 33.) That same day, Mrs. Willey sent emails to teachers and staff at Black Butte High School and to Principal Blake, reflecting her position that the Student was too young to make such “life changing decisions.” (Id. ¶¶ 3435.) Mrs. Willey's emails directed staff and teachers to refer to the Student by her given birth name and female pronouns only, and threatened to take the issue to the District's central administration should any teacher or staff member defy her instructions. (Id.) In response Principal Blake advised that he had reached out to Human Resources concerning her request for further clarification and would be in touch with her upon receipt of that clarification. Id. at ¶ 36.
Following Mrs. Willey's email directive, the Student changed course and requested to be called by the Student's given name and female pronouns. (Id. ¶ 38-39; ECF No. 162 ¶¶ 3-5.) The District both respected the Student's initial wishes to be called by a male name and male pronoun, and the Student's subsequent request to be referred to by the Student's given female name and female pronoun. (ECF No. 16-2 ¶¶ 3-5.) Mrs. Willey alleges that in a meeting in April 2022, Ms. Bolton told Mrs. Willey that if the Student came back to the Student's teachers and requested to be called by a male name and pronoun the staff would do as the Student requested, regardless of Mrs. Willey's directions. (ECF No. 1 at ¶ 39; see also ECF No. 21-1 at ¶ 7.) In addition, Ms. Bolton stated they would not tell Mrs. Willey of the Student's request. Id.
As to her role as a teacher, the District maintains no student taught by Mrs. Willey has ever requested to use any name or pronoun other than their legal name and corresponding sex assigned at birth. (ECF No. 16-3 at ¶ 9.) The District contends it is unlikely Mrs. Willey will ever be faced with such a situation. (Id. ¶ 10.) The Complaint does not contain any allegations that Mrs. Willey has been required to apply this policy as a teacher. However, Defendants have not stated and do not assert that this policy is not applicable to Mrs. Willey.
At the beginning of the 2022-23 School year the District sent teachers a document entitled “SCSD #1 Special Services Non-Negotiables August 15,2022” which in pertinent part provides:
7. Preferred/Chosen Names Procedure. As you become acquainted with your students, you may encounter students wishing to use a preferred or chosen name. A preferred/chosen name is any name a student chooses to use other than their legal name. For example, a student may wish to shorten their first name (e.g. Steven to Steve) or to be referred to by their middle name or a nickname. Sweetwater County School District Number One is committed to promoting an educational environment that is supportive and respectful to all students. Calling a person by their preferred name and pronoun shows respect and contributes to the District's commitment to providing a safe and nondiscriminatory educational environment. Accordingly, staff must use a student's preferred/chosen name or pronoun in verbal, written, and electronic communications. Staff must respect the privacy of all students regarding such choice. Violations of this procedure may...
To continue reading
Request your trial