Harmeet K. Dhillon has only been the head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division for a couple of weeks, but last night she sent a strong signal that big changes are coming to one of the most powerful and influential branches of the DOJ.
Last fall, fathers of girls on the Bow High School soccer team wore pink wristbands, emblazoned with 'XX,' to one of the school's soccer games against Plymouth High School, which had a 'trans girl' on its team. The gesture was an obvious protest against this unfairness, but the Bow School District kicked the fathers out of the game and issued a no-trespass order against them.
Naturally, some of the fathers sued the school district for this clear violation of their free speech and civil rights.
It should have been a slam-dunk win for the fathers, but yesterday, Riley Gaines tweeted that Federal District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe (the widower of astronaut Christa McAuliffe) had incomprehensibly ruled that the school district had acted within its rights.
A federal judge just ruled that two fathers can't wear pink wristbands that say "XX" to silently protest male inclusion in women's sports
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) April 15, 2025
The judge said the female chromosomes, XX, are a "demeaning and harassing assertion"https://t.co/AKpAovWWQn
Insanity. Stating a biological fact, that men are men and women are women, is now a 'demeaning and harassing assertion' that 'targets' the man trying to cheat in women's sports.
The Bow School District was acting within its authority to kick two soccer dads out of a girls game for wearing pink 'XX' wristbands as a silent protest against biological males playing on girls’ teams, a federal judge ruled Monday.
But one of the dads, Anthony Foote, told NHJournal he plans to keep fighting for what he sees as the rights of women and girls.
'What was our offense? Supporting girls’ sports and defending biological reality?' Foote said. “This ruling is a slap in the face to every parent who believes schools should be a place of fairness, not political indoctrination. The judge openly admitted that Pride flags are allowed because they promote ‘inclusion,’ but wristbands defending women’s sports are banned because they might ‘offend’ someone. That’s viewpoint discrimination, plain and simple — and it’s unconstitutional.'
Recommended
McAuliffe justified his ruling by stating that school sporting events are 'limited public forums,' so the parents can have their free speech rights restricted.
News of the decision quickly reached the desk of Attorney General Pam Bondi, who promised that the DOJ would not take this ruling lying down.
I have asked my @CivilRights Division to examine this matter. This DOJ stands with women and their supportive parents. https://t.co/5sJZ0dEQ1y
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) April 16, 2025
Enter the newly confirmed chief of the Civil Rights Division.
We've written often about Dhillon at Twitchy for how fierce of a fighter she has been throughout her career, most specifically with respect to battling against COVID mandates, gender ideology, and election fraud. When Trump nominated her as his Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, we knew that much-needed change was coming to the DOJ.
Last night, Dhillon -- on ner newly minted government X account -- blasted the ruling and promised that it would not stand.
This ruling is unconstitutional and will not stand. @CivilRights is examining this closely. Every father has not only a right but also a duty to stand up for his daughters, and the right to free speech is not curtailed by subjective “feelings.” https://t.co/CE0G2iS5Gd
— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) April 16, 2025
As we noted when Dhillon was confirmed: BOOMITY.
Never fear, our AG @AGPamBondi and her team, of which I’m proudly a part, have made it a priority to protect parental and girls’ rights. It’s the FIRST amendment for a reason! https://t.co/VY0wzkahiF
— Harmeet K. Dhillon (@HarmeetKDhillon) April 16, 2025
It is crazy that a federal judge would think he could get away with curtailing First Amendment rights of parents when their wristbands contained no threats or even vulgarity, just biological reality.
Maybe they got used to the fact that Biden's DOJ allowed and encouraged this sort of thing, but someone should have told Judge McAuliffe that there's a new sheriff in town, and Harmeet don't play that.
One of the fathers suing Bow School District thanked Dhillon for her swift response and promised investigation.
Thank you for commenting on our case. We obviously disagree with this opinion. The legal fight will continue! ⚔️ https://t.co/DcbiLua8n7
— Del Kolde (@KoldeDel) April 16, 2025
Imagine being this father and having a judge tell you that you cannot speak on behalf of your daughter.
Thank you! This cannot stand. Thank God we have you defending our rights!
— Liz 🦋 🇺🇸 (@ElizabethSolle2) April 16, 2025
Dhillion is a far cry from Biden's Civil Rights Chief Kristen Clarke, who not only would regularly demonize police officers (such as in the Jussie Smollett case), but also wanted to place men in women's prisons. (Oh, and she also clearly lied to Congress about her own arrest history during her confirmation hearing.)
Agree. Nice job @Riley_Gaines_ as the movement continues to grow! From a quick view, it seems like the court missed the entire intent of Tinker... and used the later Appellate Decision in Nuxoll to justify restrictions on silent free speech symbols. The court refers to 17 pages…
— Alex Keely ✟ 🇺🇸 JD MSIT (@alexanderkeely) April 16, 2025
Here is the rest of this tweet explaining how Judge McAuliffe was wrong on the points of law (intentionally or otherwise):
The court refers to 17 pages of pre-event 'context,' which seems to have very little to do with the actual events that occurred and were the result of the removal of the parents by the school. No shouting or harassment occurred from the parents in the facts the court documented(19). Without a potential for substantial disruption or material interference with school activities, and without those in fact occurring (Tinker at 514), it seems like parents do not lose their free speech rights to wear articles of clothing even if the school doesn’t like their speech even in a limited public forum. Glad that @AAGDhillon’s team is on it!
This explanation is in reference to the Tinker v. Des Moines Supreme Court case in 1969, which affirmed that students could wear black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War.
And given the fact that other students today are openly wearing Hamas colors and bringing Palestinian flags to protests, while openly harassing Jewish students, it's difficult to imagine how McAuliffe's ruling will stand.
This will be overruled on appeal. There is no protection against being offended. That is incompatible with the First Amendment.
— Kevin Ledgister (@KevinLedgister) April 15, 2025
We are not the UK, Germany, or other countries harass or fine people because they said hurty things.
And Dhillon is there to make sure that the appeal happens and the First Amendment is reaffirmed.
We need a "three strikes," law for judges.
— Perry McIntyre (@PerryMcIntyre13) April 16, 2025
Three violations against the Constitution, you lose your bench.
McAuliffe is a George H.W. Bush appointee, but he is also a partisan, having joined one of Biden's failed presidential campaigns back in the 1980s.
This judge hates women
— Diane J (@studious5) April 16, 2025
It's difficult to argue against that point, given his ruling.
I can’t tell you how happy it makes me to have someone with some guts in this office!
— Thomas Kendall (@Fly_Curious214) April 16, 2025
We're also happy to have someone who believes in -- and understands -- the Constitution in the office. We could use a lot more federal district court judges who do, as well.
We're so lucky to have you, AAG Dhillon! https://t.co/jlt6891Com
— Richard T (@Arcturus5324) April 16, 2025
There are a lot of wonderful people in the administration, but Harmeet is the best hands down. https://t.co/mQf9mVU7lH
— Sally R Hemmer (@SallyRoth) April 16, 2025
Hey, that's what we said back when she was nominated.
👏👏👏👏 Things are changing.
— MBW (@jamsinnebraska) April 16, 2025
For the better and not a minute too soon.
Harmeet Dhillon is famous on X for her knitting talents, so we hope that, after her investigation and after this ridiculous ruling from McAuliffe is overturned, she will knit some brand new, pink XX wirstbands for the fathers in New Hampshire who just want to protect their daughters from having to play soccer against men.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member