Free Speech on Campus

Professor Lee Epstein and Chancellor Andrew D. Martin
Political Science 334
Spring 2025

Group 4. The Pronoun Dispute
(TA: Ethan Knoll, e.knoll@wustl.edu)

(Excerpted and adapted from the Harvard Law Review, nbcnews, and The Guardian.)

In 2016, Shawnee State University (a public school in Ohio) informed its faculty that its non-discrimination policy required all professors to refer to students using pronouns that “reflect a student’s self-asserted gender identity.” 

But in 2018, when a transgender student, Jane Doe, asked her philosophy professor, Nicholas Meriwether, to refer to her with “she/her” pronouns, Meriwether declined Doe’s request. Meriwether, an evangelical Christian, claimed that compliance with the school’s pronoun policy would force him to violate his religious belief that gender is fixed at conception.  

For the rest of the semester, Meriwether addressed all other students with the honorifics “Ms.” or “Mr.,” which he did to “foster[] an atmosphere of seriousness and mutual respect,” but referred to Doe by only her last name. 

In response, Doe complained that she suffered disparate treatment—that referring to Doe alone by last name only was not “in line with [Meriwether’s] practice of addressing other female members in the class.” The school’s investigation concluded that Meriwether’s refusal to recognize Doe’s gender identity created a discriminatory and hostile learning environment in violation of Title IX: “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

Meriwether was issued a written warning instructing him to use students’ requested pronouns “to avoid further corrective actions.” Meriwether challenged the university’s disciplinary action. He alleged that it violated his First Amendment right to free speech, among other claims.

Shawnee State eventually paid Meriwether $400,000 to settle the dispute. The University explained that settling was an “economic decision” and “adamantly denied that anyone at Shawnee State deprived Dr. Meriwether of his free speech rights…“ The University added:

Over the course of this lawsuit, it became clear that the case was being used to advance divisive social and political agendas at a cost to the university and its students. That cost is better spent on fulfilling Shawnee State’s mission of service to our students, families and community.

To help you prepare your class presentation:

  1. Review the in-class material and readings on the Right Not to Speak (Compelled Speech) and Who is Speaking

  2. Review the Chicago Statements on free expression

  3. Read an interpretation of academic freedom written by the then-president of the AAUP

  4. Read the AAUP's 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Academic Tenure—focus on pp. 292-300 and especially the section on pp. 298-299 (beginning with “Since there are no rights without corresponding duties, the considerations heretofore set down with respect to the freedom of the academic teacher entail certain correlative obligations” and ending with “It is much to be desired that test cases should be made of any infractions of the rule”).

Your presentation should address the following (applying the tools we considered in class):

SUBGROUP 1. After briefly summarizing the controversy, defend the position that public universities interfere with the free speech rights of instructors when they require instructors to use pronouns that “reflect a student’s self-asserted gender identity.”

SUBGROUP 2. Defend the position that public universities don’t interfere with the free speech rights of instructors when they require instructors to use pronouns that “reflect a student’s self-asserted gender identity.”