Hollidaysburg Area School District files petition to dismiss teachers’ lawsuit over LGBTQ+ classroom displays

Educators oppose policy that bans LGBTQ+ displays in classrooms

The Hollidaysburg Area School District and its top officials filed a petition late last week asking a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by two district teachers challenging a newer policy that prohibits classroom displays related to sexual orientation or gender identity.

Both teachers have spent many years in the district, and in June, identifying themselves as lesbian women, filed a federal class action lawsuit referring to the new policy as "blatantly homophobic," and stating, "The District's policy endangers the wellbeing of members of the LGBTQ+ community including the LGBTQ+ students in the District."

The lawsuit is seeking an injunction barring enforcement of the policy and asking in excess of $150,000 each in damages and coverage of legal fees.

The two teachers have court permission to file their complaint under the pseudonyms of Jane Doe and Jane Roe -- Doe being in the district for 16 years and Roe, 10 years.

District officials, including the school board, Superintendent Curtis Whitesel, Junior High School Principal Dale McCall and coordinator for Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, Benjamin Caldwell, filed a petition seeking dismissal of the complaint.

This is the second motion to dismiss filed by the defendants, as the first -- filed on Aug. 26 -- was denied by U.S. District Judge Stephanie L. Haines on Aug. 27. Haines stated in her ruling that the defendants failed to include a statement confirming they made "good faith efforts" to come to an agreement with the plaintiffs, which is a requirement for dismissal.

The defendants were given until Sept. 10 to file an amended motion with the required documentation.

The present motion was filed Sept. 9.

The district, represented by Pittsburgh attorney Jeffrey R. Hantz, is denying the allegations that the action taken by the school board in October 2025, are in violation of Title IX, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the free speech provisions of the Constitution.

The policy in question, as outlined by the district, prohibits decor related to sexual orientation or gender identity in school buildings or at school activities.

It bans flags, banners, posters, signs, pins, buttons, insignias or photographs concerning sexual orientation and gender identity.

As a result of the policy, items in rainbow colors (like a mathematical symbol of pi), signs proclaiming "Diversive, Inclusive" and a sign mentioning "gender identity" were removed from the classrooms.

The district explains in its petition for dismissal, "The policy itself prohibits decor advocating for or against LGBTQ+ messaging."

The district's petition pointed out that the lawsuit by the teachers does not discuss whether individuals opposed to their beliefs can display items.

Also, Hollidaysburg argued, a teacher for instance using bulletin boards in a public school is not really the alleged "speaker" when it comes to the issue of "free speech."

The "speaker" in a public classroom in reality is "the public school itself," the petition emphasized.

"The policy in question does nothing to curb speech of (the teachers) as private citizens, and (the teachers) can point to no right to decorate a school room in a way that violates school policy," the argument continued.

The district next addressed the accusation that the policy is in violation of Title IX, noting the teachers "have failed to demonstrate they were treated less favorably than those of other sexual orientations."

Title IX or the Civil Rights Act bans sex-based discrimination in education.

The lawsuit filed by the teachers also claims the policy enacted by the school board violates the Equal Protection Clause (the Fourteenth Amendment) of the Constitution.

The district counters: "The Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not violated when a school district restricts classroom displays that do not adhere to the district's approved curriculum.

"Plaintiffs here do not have constitutional protections to teach political viewpoints in their math and English classes," the district petition stated.

As to the free speech argument made by the teachers, the district responded, stating: "Classroom decor and the decisions about what can be displayed belong to the school district."

The district then clarified that "the policy in question does not restrict the speech (of the teachers) when they are acting as private citizens."

The restrictive policy passed by the school board nearly a year ago "does not infringe on any liberties the employee might have enjoyed as a private citizen," the district's petition concluded.

Haines has given the teachers until Oct. 8 to reply to the Hollidaysburg petition.

The school district will then have a month to provide a Sur-Reply -- if the teachers respond to the motion to dismiss.