IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

CEDAR RAPIDS DIVISION

PARENTS DEFENDING EDUCATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

LINN-MAR COMMUNITY SCHOOL 22-cv-78

Case No. ____________
DISTRICT; SHANNON BISGARD, in his
official capacity as Superintendent of Linn-Mar
Community School District; BRITTANIA
MOREY, CLARK WEAVER, BARRY
BUCHHOLZ, SONDRA NELSON, MATT
ROLLINGER, MELISSA WALKER, and
RACHEL WALL, in their official capacities as
members of the Linn Marr Community School
District School Board,

Defendants.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Parents Defending Education (“PDE”) brings this complaint against Defendants

Linn-Mar Community School District (“Linn-Mar”) and other Linn-Mar officials and alleges as

follows:

INTRODUCTION
1. Nearly a century of Supreme Court precedent makes two things clear: parents have a

constitutional liberty interest in the care, custody, and control of their children, and students do not

abandon their First Amendment rights at the schoolhouse gate. The Linn-Mar Community School

District is flouting both of these constitutional guarantees through its recent adoption of Policy

504.13-R.

2. The Policy authorizes children to make fundamentally important decisions concerning

their gender identity without any parental involvement and to then hide these decisions from their

parents.

-1-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 1 of 30
 3. Per the Policy, children can create a “gender support plan” to assist their gender

“transition.” Through this plan, the District can, among other things, (1) require all employees and

students to address the child by a new name; (2) require all employees and students to address the

child by a new pronoun; (3) have the child’s name changed on numerous government documents,

including identification cards, yearbooks, and diplomas; (4) allow the child to use the restrooms, locker

rooms, and changing facilities that correspond with the child’s gender identity; (5) allow the child to

participate in physical education classes, intramural sports, clubs, and other events that correspond

with the child’s gender identity; and (6) allow the child to room with other students who share the

child’s gender identity.

4. These actions can happen without any knowledge or input from the child’s parents.

Instead, these decisions will be made solely by the child and “school administrators and/or school

counselors.”

5. And it is not just secrecy through silence. The District will withhold this information

even if it is specifically requested by parents. Under the Policy, the District will not tell parents whether

their child has requested a Gender Support Plan, whether the child has made requests concerning their

gender identity, or any other information that would reveal the child’s “transgender status.” Parents

are completely and purposely left in the dark. The Policy plainly violates parents’ rights under the

Fourteenth Amendment.

6. Linn-Mar has displayed a similar disregard for students’ First Amendment rights. The

Policy punishes students for expressing their sincerely held beliefs about biological sex and compels

them to affirm the beliefs of administrators and their fellow students. Specifically, the Policy prohibits

speech that doesn’t “respect a student’s gender identity” and “misgendering,” which is defined as

“intentionally or accidentally us[ing] the incorrect name or pronouns to refer to a person.” This speech

code blatantly violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

-2-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 2 of 30
 7. PDE brings this action to protect parents’ rights to raise their children and students’

rights to freedom of expression.

PARTIES
8. Plaintiff PDE is a nationwide, grassroots membership organization whose members

include parents, students, and other concerned citizens. PDE’s mission is to prevent—through

advocacy, disclosure, and, if necessary, litigation—the politicization of K-12 education.

9. PDE’s members include parents who live in the Linn-Mar district and whose children

are enrolled in Linn-Mar public schools.

10. Defendant Linn-Mar Community School District is the public school district for Linn-

Mar, Iowa. It provides K-12 public education services for more than 7,600 students. Linn-Mar

operates seven elementary schools, two intermediate schools, two middle schools, and one high

school.

11. Defendant Shannon Bisgard is the Superintendent of Linn-Mar Community School

District. In that role, Bisgard is responsible for the oversight and enforcement of all Linn-Mar policies,

including the Policy challenged here. Bisgard is sued in his official capacity.

12. Defendants Brittania Morey, Clark Weaver, Barry Buchholz, Sondra Nelson, Matt

Rollinger, Melissa Walker, and Rachel Wall are members of the Linn-Mar School Board. The Board

Defendants are responsible for the enactment and oversight of all Linn-Mar policies, including the

Policy challenged here. The Board Defendants are sued in their official capacities.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

13. This action arises under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States

Constitution and is brought via 42 U.S.C. §§1983 and 1988.

14. The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1343.

15. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391 because Linn-Mar resides here and a

substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred here.

-3-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 3 of 30
 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
I. The Growing Movement to Exclude Parents from Decisions Concerning Gender
Identity

16. “[T]he interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children[] is perhaps

the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by [the Supreme] Court.” Troxel v. Granville,

530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000) (plurality). Children are “not the mere creature of the state,” Pierce v. Soc’y of the

Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus & Mary, 268 U.S. 510, 535 (1925), and the “right[] … to raise one’s

children ha[s] been deemed ‘essential’” and one of the “‘basic civil rights of man,’” Stanley v. Illinois,

405 U.S. 645, 651 (1972). These parental rights are rooted in the “historical[] … recogni[tion] that

natural bonds of affection lead parents to act in the best interests of their children.” Parham v. J. R.,

442 U.S. 584, 602 (1979) (citing 1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries, 447; 2 J. Kent, Commentaries on

American Law, 190).

17. Thus, “‘[i]t is cardinal’” that “‘the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in

the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can

neither supply nor hinder.’” Troxel, 530 U.S. at 65-66 (quoting Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166

(1944)). “This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond

debate as an enduring American tradition.” Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 232 (1972).

18. The right of parental control is particularly strong in circumstances involving

“fundamental values” and “intimate decision[s].” Arnold v. Bd. of Educ. of Escambia Cnty. Ala., 880 F.2d

305, 313 (11th Cir. 1989) (parents’ rights protect “the opportunity to counter influences on the child

the parents find inimical to their religious beliefs or the values they wish instilled in their children”);

see also H. L. v. Matheson, 450 U.S. 398, 410 (1981) (parents’ rights “presumptively include[ ] counseling

[their children] on important decisions”). In such circumstances, parents are presumed to be fit to

make decisions for their children absent strong evidence to the contrary. See Parham, 442 U.S. at 602-

03.

-4-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 4 of 30
 19. The Supreme Court has paid special attention to the rights of parents “in cases

involving parent-state conflicts in the areas of medical care and education.” Arnold, 880 F.2d at 312-

13. Indeed, “[i]t is not educators, but parents who have primary rights in the upbringing of children.

School officials have only a secondary responsibility and must respect these rights.” Gruenke v. Seip,

225 F.3d 290, 307 (3d Cir. 2000). “Public schools must not forget that ‘in loco parentis’ does not mean

displace parents.” Id.

20. A child’s gender identity implicates the most fundamental issues concerning the child,

including the child’s religion, medical care, mental health, sense of self, and more. Yet despite

“extensive precedent” that parents must be involved in decisions concerning these types of issues,

Troxel, 530 U.S. at 66 (listing cases), school districts across the country are increasingly excluding

parents from decisionmaking when gender identity is involved. “In the past few years, school districts

nationwide have quietly adopted policies requiring staff to facilitate and ‘affirm’ gender identity

transitions at school without parental notice or consent—and even in secret from parents.” Luke Berg,

How Schools’ Transgender Policies Are Eroding Parents’ Rights, 1, American Enterprise Institute, (Mar. 2022),

https://bit.ly/39s1GQF.

21. A school district in Wisconsin, for example, recently instructed teachers that “parents

‘are not entitled to know their kids’ identities’ and that ‘this knowledge must be earned.’” Id. at 2. One

mother in California “went two years without knowing her sixth grader had transitioned at school.”

Donna St. George, Gender Transitions At School Spur Debates Over When, Or If, Parents Are Told, The

Washington Post, (July 18, 2022), https://wapo.st/3bkEeWt. “Basically, I was the last one to find

out,” said the mother. Id. “They were all saving my kid from me.” Id. The mother only made the

discovery “when she took her child to the hospital one day and a doctor told her. She was stunned.”

Id.

-5-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 5 of 30
 22. Under parental exclusion policies, “[e]ducators and staff,” not parents, “work closely

with the student to determine what changes are necessary . . . to ensure their safety and well-being.”

GLSEN & National Center for Transgender Equality, Model Local Education Policy on Transgender and

Non-Binary Students, 7-8 (Sept. 2018), https://bit.ly/3PHTyv9. Often, that process is formalized in a

“Gender Support Plan” created by the school for the child.

23. These exclusionary policies are not just unconstitutional; they are harmful to both

parents and children. “Parents across many political beliefs argue that they can’t be supportive if no

one tells them that their child came out.” St. George, supra. According to Erica Anderson, a clinical

psychologist who identifies as a transgender woman and is the former president of the U.S.

Professional Association for Transgender Health, “leaving parents in the dark is not the answer.” Id.

“If there are issues between parents and children, they need to be addressed.” Id. Such secrecy “only

postpones . . . and aggravates any conflict that may exist.” Id. In a world in which schools “routinely

send notes home to parents about lesser matters,” such as “playground tussles, missing homework,

and social events,” there is absolutely no justification for withholding such fundamentally important

information from their parents. Id.

24. Parental exclusion policies pose significant risks for parents of children on the autism

spectrum in particular. Children on the spectrum are far likelier to identify as transgender or non-

binary than other children. See, e.g., Varun Warrier, et al., Elevated Rates of Autism, Other

Neurodevelopmental and Psychiatric Diagnoses, and Autistic Traits in Transgender and Gender-Diverse Individuals,

(Aug. 2020), https://bit.ly/3QUc3Oa. Strong parent-child relationships are critical for their

development.

25. Parental exclusion policies “run[] directly against a strong body of case law recognizing

parents’ constitutional rights to raise their children.” Berg, supra, at 2. Nevertheless, they have

proliferated to school districts across the country, including Linn-Mar.

-6-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 6 of 30
II. The First Amendment Rights of Students in Public Schools
26. Public-school students have First Amendment rights, and those rights do not

disappear “at the schoolhouse gate.” Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506

(1969). Because “America’s public schools are the nurseries of democracy,” students must be free to

express their opinions, even if their views are “unpopular.” Mahanoy Area Sch. Dist. v. B.L. by and through

Levy, 141 S. Ct. 2038, 2046 (2021). Protecting unpopular speech in public schools “ensur[es] that future

generations understand the workings in practice of the well-known aphorism, ‘I disapprove of what

you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’” Id.

27. Despite these well-established rights, schools often seek to stamp out controversial

student expression. Speech codes are the tried-and-true method of suppressing unpopular student

speech. They prohibit expression that would otherwise be constitutionally protected. See Foundation

for Individual Rights in Education, Spotlight on Speech Codes 2021, 10, https://bit.ly/3pdQ09E. Speech

codes punish students for undesirable categories of speech such as “harassment,” “bullying,” “hate

speech,” and “incivility.” Id. Because these policies impose vague, overbroad, content-based (and

sometimes viewpoint-based) restrictions on speech, federal courts regularly strike them down. Id. at

10, 24; Speech First v. Fenves, 979 F.3d 319, 338-39 n.17 (5th Cir. 2020) (collecting “a consistent line of

cases that have uniformly found campus speech codes unconstitutionally overbroad or vague”).

28. Schools are increasingly adopting speech codes regarding gender identity to compel

students to affirm beliefs they do not hold and that are incompatible with their deeply held

convictions. So-called “preferred pronouns policies” are an increasingly used method of compelling

student speech. “Preferred pronoun policies” subject students to formal discipline for referring to

other students according to the pronouns that are consistent with their biological sex rather than their

gender identity. Under these types of policies, a student who uses “he” or “him” when referring to a

biological male who identifies as a female will be punished for “misgendering” that student. See, e.g.,

-7-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 7 of 30
Rick Esenberg & Luke Berg, The Progressive Pronoun Police Come for Middle Schoolers, The Wall Street

Journal, (May 23, 2022), https://on.wsj.com/3NTV50b.

III. The District’s Parental Exclusion and Speech Policy – Policy 504.13-R
29. On April 25, 2022, over fierce opposition from parents, the Linn-Mar School Board

adopted Policy 504.13-R, entitled “Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students

Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes.” See Exhibit A.

30. The Policy is designed to do three things: (1) effectuate students’ “gender transition”

requests; (2) keep the District’s actions secret from the student’s parents; and (3) punish other students

who do not use a student’s preferred pronouns when speaking.

A. The District’s Policy on Gender Identity Transitions

31. Policy 504.13-R gives “[a]ny student, regardless of how they identify,” the right to meet

with a school administrator or school counselor to create and implement a “Gender Support Plan.”

A Gender Support Plan is defined as a “document that may be used to create a shared understanding

about the ways in which a student’s gender identity will be accounted for and supported at school.”

32. When a student requests a Gender Support Plan, the school “will hold a meeting with

the student within 10 school days of being notified about the request.” The student’s parents have no

right to participate in this meeting or to even know that it is happening. The Policy states that “[t]he

student should agree with who is a part of the meeting, including whether their parent/guardian will

participate.” It also specifies that the student “will have priority of their support plan over their

parent/guardian.”

33. Students can use their Gender Support Plan to make critically important decisions

about their identity, health, and education, and the District will agree to them without any parental

involvement or notification. In particular, the student can choose to:

-8-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 8 of 30
 • Be addressed by all school employees and students by a new name. The Policy states that
“[e]very student has the right to be addressed by a name . . . that corresponds to their gender
identity.”

• Have their name changed for all “logins, email systems, student identification cards, non-
legal documents such as diplomas and awards, yearbooks, and at events such as graduation.”

• Be addressed by all school employees and students by a new pronoun. The Policy states that
“[e]very student has the right to be addressed by a . . . pronoun that corresponds to their
gender identity.”

• Use restrooms, locker rooms, and changing facilities that correspond to the student’s gender
identity, rather than their biological sex.

• Participate in “physical education classes, intramural sports, clubs, and school events in a
manner consistent with their gender identity.”

• Be allowed to “room with other students who share their gender identity” on overnight
fieldtrips.

34. While students can make these requests through a Gender Support Plan, they need

not go through this process to make these requests and have them granted by the District.

B. The District’s Exclusion of Parents from Gender-Identity Decisions

35. The Policy prevents parents from having knowledge or control over their child’s

decisions involving gender identity. According to the Policy, “[a]ny student in seventh grade or older

will have priority of their support plan over their parent/guardian,” and parents have no right to know

about or be “a part of the meeting” to develop a Gender Support Plan. Decisions regarding a student’s

gender identity will be made “regardless of age.”

36. Importantly, the District will not tell parents whether their child has requested or been

given a Gender Support Plan, whether the child has made requests or actions have been taken

concerning their gender identity, or whether it has any other information that would reveal the child’s

“transgender status.” Indeed, the Policy openly encourages children to deceive their parents by hiding

the name and pronouns that they are using at school.

-9-
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 9 of 30
 37. The Policy further requires that a student’s Gender Support Plan and “all written

records related to student meetings concerning their gender identity and/or gender transition” must

be maintained in a “temporary file” that shall be “maintained by the school counselor.”

38. The Policy defines “gender identity” and gender “transition” broadly to include a host

of important information about a child, including “social, medical, and/or legal” information

concerning any transition. These “temporary” records “will only be accessible to staff members that

the student has authorized in advance to do so.”

C. The District’s Punishment of Disfavored Speech

39. In addition to attempting to eliminate parental rights, the Policy requires students to

use other students’ preferred pronouns when speaking.

40. Under the Policy, “[a]n intentional and/or persistent refusal by . . . students to respect

a student’s gender identity is a violation of school board policies 103.1 Anti-Bullying and Harassment,

104.1 Equal Educational Opportunity, and 104.3 Prohibition of Discrimination and/or Harassment

based on Sex Per Title IX.”

41. In addition, the Policy prohibits “[r]epeated or intentional misgendering.” The Policy

defines “misgendering” as “intentionally or accidentally us[ing] the incorrect name or pronouns to

refer to a person.” Potential disciplinary sanctions for using the wrong pronouns or “misgendering” a

student “include suspension and expulsion.”

IV. PDE’s Members and This Litigation

42. PDE has members who live in the Linn-Mar district and whose children attend Linn-

Mar schools.

43. Parents A, B, C, D, E, F, and G are members of PDE.

44. Parent A lives within the boundaries of the Linn-Mar and is the parent of a school-

aged child. Parent A’s child recently completed the sixth grade at a Linn-Mar elementary school.

- 10 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 10 of 30
 45. Parent A’s child is on the autism spectrum and has a sensory processing disability. As

a result, Parent A’s child has difficulty distinguishing between male characteristics and female

characteristics. Parent A’s family has devoted significant resources to therapy services to help their

child understand sex-specific differences. Still, Parent A’s child sometimes makes statements that

could lead an outside observer to believe that they are confused about their gender identity or

expressing a “gender-fluid” or “non-binary” identity.

46. As a parent, Parent A is keenly aware of research showing that adolescents on the

autism spectrum are far more likely to assert a transgender or “non-binary” identity than neurotypical

adolescents.

47. Parent A is also aware that several children on the autism spectrum at Linn-Mar middle

schools or Linn-Mar High School have recently asserted transgender or “non-binary” identities.

48. Parent A’s child was scheduled to begin seventh grade at a Linn-Mar middle school.

Parent A knows that, beginning in seventh grade, the Policy categorically forbids school officials from

revealing any information about a student’s gender identity to their parents without the student’s

express permission.

49. Because Parent A’s child has difficulty distinguishing between male characteristics and

female characteristics and often makes statements that are easily misinterpreted, Parent A is deeply

concerned that their child will say something at school that will be interpreted as an assertion of a

“gender fluid,” “non-binary,” or transgender identity by Linn-Mar officials who do not know Parent

A’s child as well as Parent A does.

50. Parent A believes there is a substantial risk that their child will receive a Gender

Support Plan or other gender-specific treatment without their knowledge or consent if their child

begins middle school at Linn-Mar this August.

- 11 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 11 of 30
 51. Parent A wants to ask the District on a regular basis whether their child has requested

or been given a Gender Support Plan, whether their child has made requests or actions have been

taken concerning their child’s gender identity, and whether the District has any other information that

would reveal their child’s “transgender status.” Parent A wants to receive this information without

seeking “permission” from their child. Policy 504.13-R, however, prohibits school officials from

revealing any of this information to Parent A without their child’s permission.

52. Parent A also wants to exercise their fundamental right as a parent to guide their child’s

upbringing and to help their child navigate any issues that might arise regarding their perception of

their gender identity.

53. Under the Policy, however, Parent A knows that when these issues arise, their role will

be displaced by Linn-Mar administrators. Parent A knows that the Policy requires school officials to

immediately accept and validate a child’s expression of gender identity—regardless of their age or

development—without questioning how the child arrived at that conclusion.

54. Moreover, Parent A’s child’s social development is far below those of neurotypical

children of the same age, so it is unlikely that Parent A’s child will be able to understand the scope of

this issue or effectively communicate their true preference. Thus, if Parent A’s child is assigned a

Gender Support Plan or if Linn-Mar officials take other steps to “affirm” that Parent A’s child is

transgender or “non-binary,” Parent A is highly unlikely to learn about those actions.

55. Since the Policy was enacted on April 25, Parent A has repeatedly expressed their

concerns to Linn-Mar officials and requested confirmation that the school district will not assign their

child a Gender Support Plan or take any other gender identity-related actions without informing

Parent A and obtaining Parent A’s consent. Linn-Mar officials have declined to provide those

assurances.

- 12 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 12 of 30
 56. Parent A knows that their child will likely receive a Gender Support Plan or other

gender-specific treatment without Parent A’s knowledge or consent if their child begins middle school

at Linn-Mar this August. To avoid these harms to their child, Parent A has decided to withdraw their

child from enrollment in the Linn-Mar middle school their child was scheduled to attend. The

existence and enforcement of the Policy was the primary factor motivating Parent A’s decision. If the

Policy is rescinded or enjoined, Parent A will enroll their child in middle school at Linn-Mar the

following year. If the Policy is not rescinded or enjoined, Parent A will not send their child to middle

school at Linn-Mar

57. Parent B lives within the boundaries of Linn-Mar and is the parent of a school aged

child. Parent B has a daughter enrolled in Linn-Mar High School.

58. Parent B’s daughter has special needs.

59. As a parent, Parent B is keenly aware of research showing that adolescents with special

needs are more likely to assert a transgender or “non-binary” identity than neurotypical adolescents.

Parent B also knows that adolescent females comprise a disproportionate percentage of school-aged

children who assert transgender or “non-binary” identities.

60. Some of Parent B’s daughter’s special-needs classes are held in a classroom that also

functions as the meeting location for the LGBT student club. The teacher in that classroom is the

faculty advisor for the club. Thus, the classroom walls contain several posters with information about

various gender identities, gender “social transitions,” and “preferred pronouns.” Parent B’s daughter

is extremely impressionable and often follows the lead of other students.

61. Parent B is deeply concerned that their daughter will say or do something that will be

interpreted as an assertion of a gender identity by Linn-Mar officials who do not know her as well as

Parent B does. Parent B believes there is a substantial risk that their child will receive a Gender Support

Plan or other gender-specific treatment without their knowledge or consent.

- 13 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 13 of 30
 62. Parent B wants to ask the District on a regular basis whether their child has requested

or been given a Gender Support Plan, whether their child has made requests or actions have been

taken concerning their child’s gender identity, and whether the District has any other information that

would reveal their child’s “transgender status.” Parent B wants to receive this information without

seeking “permission” from their child. Policy 504.13-R, however, prohibits school officials from

revealing any of this information to me without their child’s permission.

63. Parent B also wants to exercise their fundamental right as a parent to guide their child’s

upbringing and to help their child navigate any issues that might arise regarding her perception of her

gender identity.

64. Under the Policy, however, Parent B knows that when these issues arise, Parent B’s

role will be displaced by Linn-Mar administrators. The Policy requires school officials to immediately

accept and validate a child’s expression of gender identity—regardless of their age or development—

without questioning how the child arrived at that conclusion.

65. Moreover, Parent B’s daughter’s social development is far below those of neurotypical

children of the same age, so it is unlikely that she will be able to understand the scope of this issue or

effectively communicate her true preferences. Thus, if Parent B’s daughter is assigned a Gender

Support Plan or if Linn-Mar officials take other steps to “affirm” that she is transgender or “non-

binary,” Parent B is highly unlikely to learn about those actions.

66. Parent B has repeatedly expressed concerns with this policy, but Linn-Mar officials

have refused to confirm that they will inform Parent B about any gender-related issues that pertain to

Parent B’s daughter or that they will defer to Parent B’s wishes as a parent. Parent B is personally

aware of several other parents of children with special needs who have expressed similar concerns.

67. After the Policy was enacted on April 25, Parent B attempted to enroll their daughter

in a neighboring school district, but their application was denied because the district’s special-needs

- 14 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 14 of 30
programs were already at capacity. Because Parent B’s daughter requires specialized instruction,

enrolling her in private school is not an option.

68. Parent C lives within the boundaries of Linn-Mar and is the parent of a school-aged

child. Parent C’s daughter is enrolled in Linn-Mar High School.

69. Parent C believes that people are either male or female, and that although gender

dysphoria exists, it is statistically unlikely to persist past adolescence. Parent C is also aware of research

that the percentage of adolescents who identify as transgender or “non-binary” has nearly doubled

over the past five years.

70. Parent C is also aware of clinical research establishing that adolescents are significantly

more likely to announce a transgender or “non-binary” identity after other members of their social

groups do the same. Moreover, Parent C knows that adolescent girls are more likely to assert a

transgender or non-binary gender identity than adolescent males.

71. Parent C also knows that children are increasingly likely to “experiment” with gender

identity, particularly during adolescence, and that asserting a transgender or “non-binary” gender

identity has increased significantly in Linn-Mar middle schools and Linn-Mar High School.

72. To Parent C’s knowledge, Parent C’s daughter is the only member of her friend group

who does not identify as a member of the LGBT community. Based on Parent C’s daughter’s

particular life experiences and Parent C’s conversations with her, Parent C believes that there is a

substantial risk that she will receive a Gender Support Plan from school administrators or otherwise

receive gender identity-related accommodations from Linn-Mar against Parent C’s wishes.

73. Parent C wants to ask the District on a regular basis whether their child has requested

or been given a Gender Support Plan, whether their child has made requests or actions have been

taken concerning their child’s gender identity, and whether the District has any other information that

would reveal their child’s “transgender status.” Parent C wants to receive this information without

- 15 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 15 of 30
seeking “permission” from their child. Policy 504.13-R, however, prohibits school officials from

revealing any of this information to Parent C without their child’s permission.

74. Parent C also wants to exercise their fundamental right as a parent to guide their

daughter’s upbringing and to help their daughter navigate any issues that might arise regarding her

perception of her gender identity.

75. Under the Policy, however, Parent C knows that when these issues arise, their role will

be displaced by Linn-Mar administrators who do not know Parent C’s child as well as Parent C does.

Parent C knows that the Policy requires school officials to immediately accept and validate a child’s

expression of gender identity—regardless of their age—without questioning how the child arrived at

that conclusion.

76. Parent C is concerned that Linn-Mar administrators will create a Gender Support Plan

and facilitate their daughter’s gender “transition” without informing Parent C or obtaining Parent C’s

consent. Parent C also worries that Linn-Mar will prioritize their daughter’s decisions about her

“preferred pronouns” and “preferred name” at school over Parent C’s wishes, even in the absence of

a formal Gender Support Plan.

77. Because the Policy categorically forbids Parent C from accessing certain information

about their daughter without her consent, Parent C will have no way of learning whether Linn-Mar is

taking these actions. And because Parent C’s daughter knows that Parent C has strong feelings about

this topic, Parent C has no reason to believe that she would inform Parent C about Linn-Mar’s actions.

78. Parent C is suffering significant emotional distress because Parent C knows that their

daughter is likely to be subjected to a Gender Support Plan or similar actions by Linn-Mar officials

that are inconsistent with Parent C’s fundamental values and implemented without Parent C’s

knowledge.

- 16 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 16 of 30
 79. Parent D lives within the boundaries of Linn-Mar and is the parent of a school-aged

child. Parent D’s child is enrolled in Linn-Mar High School.

80. Parent D’s child believes “that people are either male or female and that a person

cannot ‘transition’ from one sex to another.” Parent D’s child “has no ill-will towards members of the

LGBT community but does not believe that a student who is biologically male should be referred to

as anything other than a ‘he,’ just because ‘their truth’ is that they are actually female on the inside.”

Parent D’s child does not want to be forced to affirm that a biologically female classmate is actually a

male or to refer to a biologically male classmate as a female.

81. Due to the Policy, however, Parent D’s child “either remains silent in school

environments or attempts to avoid using pronouns entirely whenever referring to classmates or other

third parties.” Still, Parent D’s child “knows that ‘it is only a matter of time’” until they are forced to

confront the issue directly.

82. Parent D wants their child to be educated in a challenging environment that involves

the free exchange of ideas, and to be free to express their beliefs, even if others disagree with those

beliefs or find them offensive. Parent D does not want their child to be forced to affirm beliefs about

gender identity that are inconsistent with their child’s deeply held convictions.

83. Under the Policy, Parent D’s child can be punished merely for expressing an opinion

about the nature of biological sex. Parent D is concerned that their child will be subjected to formal

discipline that will harm their child’s college admission chances, unless Parent D’s child expresses an

ideology that they do not believe.

84. Parent E lives within the boundaries of Linn-Mar and is the parent of a school-aged

child. Parent E’s child is enrolled in an elementary school in Linn-Mar.

- 17 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 17 of 30
 85. Parent E has raised their child to believe that people are either male or female, and

that “a boy cannot become a girl, or vice versa.” Parent E has taught their child to be charitable to

others but also to tell the truth and always stand up for their beliefs, even if other people disagree.

86. Under the Policy, however, Parent E’s child can be disciplined for referring to another

student according to their biological sex rather than their gender identity or for merely expressing

discomfort about sharing bathrooms with teachers or students of the opposite biological sex.

87. Parent E wants their child to be educated in a challenging environment that involves

the free exchange of ideas, and to be free to express their beliefs, even if others disagree with those

beliefs or find them offensive. Parent E does not want their child to be forced to affirm beliefs about

gender identity that are inconsistent with their deeply held convictions.

88. Parent E worries that being disciplined for stating their fundamental beliefs will inflict

mental and psychological harm on their child by forcing their child to “choose” between expressing

the beliefs they have been taught at home and following the instructions of teachers and other Linn-

Mar authority figures. Parent E’s constant anxiety that their child will be subjected to this harm has,

in turn, inflicted emotional and psychological suffering on Parent E.

89. Parent F lives within the boundaries of Linn-Mar and is the parent of a school-aged

child. Parent F’s child is enrolled in an elementary school in Linn-Mar. Parent F is married to Parent

E.

90. Parent F has raised their child to believe that people are either male or female, and that

“a boy cannot become a girl, or vice versa.” Parent F has taught their child to be charitable to others

but also to tell the truth and always stand up for their beliefs, even if other people disagree.

91. Under the Policy, however, Parent F’s child can be disciplined for referring to another

student according to their biological sex rather than their gender identity or for merely expressing

discomfort about sharing bathrooms with teachers or students of the opposite biological sex.

- 18 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 18 of 30
 92. Parent F wants their child to be educated in a challenging environment that involves

the free exchange of ideas, and to be free to express their beliefs, even if others disagree with those

beliefs or find them offensive. Parent F does not want their child to be forced to affirm beliefs about

gender identity that are inconsistent with their deeply held convictions.

93. Parent F worries that being disciplined for stating their fundamental beliefs will inflict

mental and psychological harm on their child by forcing their child to “choose” between expressing

the beliefs they have been taught at home and following the instructions of teachers and other Linn-

Mar authority figures. Parent F’s constant anxiety that their child will be subjected to this harm has,

in turn, inflicted emotional and psychological suffering on Parent F.

94. Parent G lives within the boundaries of Linn-Mar and is the parent of a school-aged

child. Parent G’s son is enrolled in Linn-Mar High School.

95. Parent G has raised their son to believe that biological sex is immutable and does not

change based on someone’s internal feelings. Parent G has taught their son to be respectful towards

others but also to tell the truth and always stand up for his beliefs, even when those beliefs are

unpopular.

96. Parent G’s son believes that people are created either male or female and that a person

cannot “transition” from one sex to another. He has no ill-will towards members of the LGBT

community, but he does not want to be forced to affirm that a biologically female classmate is actually

a male, or vice versa.

97. Under the Policy, however, Parent G’s son can be disciplined for referring to another

student according to their biological sex rather than their gender identity, disagreeing with another

student’s assertion about whether they are male or female, or for simply expressing discomfort about

sharing bathrooms with teachers or students of the opposite biological sex.

- 19 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 19 of 30
 98. Because of the Policy, Parent G’s son either remains silent in school environments

when gender identity topics arise or avoids using sex-specific pronouns altogether.

99. Parent G wants their son to be educated in a challenging environment that involves

the open exchange of ideas and to be free to express his beliefs, even if others disagree with those

beliefs or find them offensive. Parent G does not want their son to be forced to affirm beliefs about

gender identity that are inconsistent with his deeply held convictions.

100. Parent G is concerned that their son will be subjected to formal discipline that will

harm his college admission chances and his extracurricular opportunities, unless he affirms ideas that

are inconsistent with his deeply held beliefs. Parent G also worries that being disciplined for stating

his fundamental beliefs will inflict mental and psychological harm on their child by forcing him to

“choose” between expressing the beliefs he has been taught at home and following the instructions

of teachers and other Linn-Mar authority figures. Further, Parent G knows that the process of

repeatedly being subjected to discipline for stating his beliefs will expose their son to reputational

harm and personal attacks from other students and members of the Linn-Mar community.

101. Parent G is considering withdrawing their son from Linn-Mar to prevent him from

suffering these harms, and others, from the Policy.

102. Parents A-G are participating in this litigation under pseudonyms, because they fear

that if their identities are discovered, they or their children will suffer retaliation from Linn-Mar and

its employees, other students, other parents, and members of the broader community.

COUNT I
Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment
(Parental Exclusion)

103. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the prior allegations in this complaint.

104. The Fourteenth Amendment provides that no State shall “deprive any person of life,

liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

- 20 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 20 of 30
 105. Under binding precedent, the Amendment “includes a substantive component that

‘provides heightened protection against government interference with certain fundamental rights and

liberty interests.’” Troxel, 530 U.S. at 65 (quoting Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 720 (1997)).

Among these unenumerated rights are those that are “‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and

tradition’” and “‘implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.’” Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., 142

S. Ct. 2228, 2257-58 (2022) (quoting Glucksburg, 521 U.S. at 721).

106. The “liberty interest . . . of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children[]

is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by [the Supreme] Court.” Troxel,

530 U.S. at 65. Nearly 100 years ago, the Supreme Court held that the “liberty” protected by the

Fourteenth Amendment includes the right of parents to “establish a home and bring up children” and

“to control the education of their own.” Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923).

107. Two years later, the Court held that the “liberty of parents and guardian” includes the

right “to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control.” Pierce, 268 U.S. at 534-

35 (1925). As the Court explained, “[t]he child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture

him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him

for additional obligations.” Id. at 535.

108. Again and again, the Supreme Court has affirmed the “fundamental right of parents

to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.” Troxel, 530 U.S. at 66

(listing cases). Simply put, “[t]he history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition

of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children.” Yoder, 406 U.S. at 232. “This

primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an

enduring American tradition.” Id.

109. The Policy violates parents’ constitutional rights. The Policy deprives parents of their

right to know what actions the District is taking with regards to fundamentally important decisions

- 21 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 21 of 30
about their children. PDE’s members want to ask on a regular basis whether their children have

requested or been given a Gender Support Plan, whether their children have made requests or actions

have been taken concerning their children’s gender identity, and whether the District has any other

information that would reveal their children’s “transgender status.” Yet under the Policy, the District

will not tell them any of this information. It is impossible for parents to direct the “care, custody, and

control of their children” when the government withholds critical information from them.

110. The Policy also deprives parents of the right to have any input or control over

fundamental decisions concerning gender identity. Under the Policy, the parent has no control over

how the District treats their child.

111. Without any parental input, the District can (1) require all employees and students to

address the child by a new name; (2) require all employees and students to address the child through

a new pronoun; (3) have the child’s name changed on numerous government documents, including

identification cards, yearbooks, and diplomas; (4) allow the child to use the restrooms, locker rooms,

and changing facilities that correspond with the child’s gender identity; (5) allow the child to participate

in physical education classes, intramural sports, clubs, and other events that correspond with the

child’s gender identity; and (6) allow the child to room with other students who share the child’s

gender identity. These are fundamental decisions implementing the most basic questions about a child’s

life, including issues of religion, medical care, mental and emotional well-being, the child’s sense of

self, and more.

112. A recent decision from the District of Kansas is directly on point. There, a local school

board policy prohibited teachers from “revealing to a student’s parents a preferred name or pronouns

the student is using at school if the student has not authorized the parents to know.” Ricard v. USD

475 Geary County, KS, 2022 WL 1471372, at *4-5 (D. Kan. May 9, 2022). Discussing the “constitutional

right [of parents] to control the upbringing of their children,” the court found it inconceivable that a

- 22 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 22 of 30
school district could constitutionally “withhold[] or conceal[] from the parents of minor children

information fundamental to a child’s identity, personhood, and mental and emotional well-being such

as their preferred name and pronouns.” Id. at *8. Whether “the District likes it or not,” the

constitutional right of parents “includes the right of a parent to have an opinion and to have a say in

what a minor child is called and by what pronouns they are referred.” Id.

113. The Linn-Mar School District “may be concerned that some parents are unsupportive

of their child’s desire to be referred to by a name other than their legal name,” to use different

pronouns, or to implement other decisions involving gender identity. Id. But this “merely proves the

point that the District’s claimed interest is an impermissible one because it is intended to interfere

with the parents’ exercise of a constitutional right to raise their children as they see fit.” Id.

114. The government must afford a “presumption of validity” to parental decisions unless

there is clear evidence to the contrary. Troxel, 530 U.S. at 67. As “long as a parent adequately cares for

his or her children (i.e., is fit), there will normally be no reason for the State to inject itself into the

private realm of the family to further question the ability of that parent to make the best decisions

concerning the rearing of that parent’s children.” Id. at 68-69; see Ricard, 2022 WL 1471372, at *8

(envisioning a “particularized and substantiated concern that disclosure to a parent could lead to child

abuse, neglect, or other illegal conduct”). But “[s]imply because the decision of a parent is not agreeable

to a child … does not automatically transfer the power to make that decision from the parents to

some agency or officer of the state.” Parham, 442 U.S. at 60.

115. Here, the District “not only fail[s] to presume” that parents will “act in the best interest

of their children, [it] assume[s] the exact opposite.” Doe v. Heck, 327 F.3d 492, 521 (7th Cir. 2003). The

District has no right to deprive parents of this critical information and control concerning their child.

The Policy plainly violates the Fourteenth Amendment.

- 23 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 23 of 30
 116. Linn-Mar adopted this policy “under color of state law” within the meaning of Section

1983.

COUNT II
Violation of the First Amendment
(Compelled Speech)

117. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the prior allegations in this complaint.

118. The Supreme Court has “held time and again that freedom of speech ‘includes both

the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all.’” Janus v. Am. Fed’n of State, Cnty.,

& Mun. Emps., Council 31, 138 S. Ct. 2448, 2463 (2018). “[T]he latter is perhaps the more sacred of the

two rights.” Telescope Media Grp. v. Lucero, 936 F.3d 740, 752 (8th Cir. 2019).

119. “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high

or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of

opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” West Virginia Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319

U.S. 624, 642 (1943) (emphasis added). “Compelling individuals to mouth support for views they find

objectionable violates that cardinal constitutional command, and in most contexts, any such effort

would be universally condemned.” Janus, 138 S. Ct. at 2463.

120. The Policy is no different from the policy requiring schoolchildren to pledge alliance

to the flag in Barnette. Like the West Virginia State Board of Education in Barnette, cf. 319 U.S. at 631,

633, Linn-Mar is requiring students to affirmatively declare statements that they believe to be false and

affirm ideologies with which they deeply disagree.

121. Meriwether v. Hartop, 992 F.3d 492 (6th Cir. 2021), is directly on point. There, the Sixth

Circuit held that a similar “preferred pronoun” requirement was “anathema to the principles

underlying the First Amendment.” Id. at 510. “Indeed, the premise that gender identity is an idea

‘embraced and advocated by increasing numbers of people is all the more reason to protect the First

Amendment rights of those who wish to voice a different view.’” Id. (quoting Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale,

- 24 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 24 of 30
530 U.S. 640, 660 (2000)). The District cannot force the children of PDE’s members to “mouth

support” for beliefs they do not hold. Janus, 138 S. Ct. at 2463.

122. Linn-Mar adopted this policy “under color of state law” within the meaning of Section

1983.

COUNT III
Violation of the First Amendment
(Content and Viewpoint-Based Discrimination)

123. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the prior allegations in this complaint.

124. “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government

may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or

disagreeable.” Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of N.Y. State Crime Victim’s Bd., 502 U.S. 105, 118 (1991).

“Content-based regulations” are “presumptively invalid.” R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 382

(1992). Accordingly, “any restriction based on the content of the speech must satisfy strict scrutiny,

that is, the restriction must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.” Pleasant

Grove City v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460, 469 (2009); see, e.g., Westfield High School L.I.F.E. Club v. City of

Westfield, 249 F. Supp. 2d 98, 123 (D. Mass. 2003) (school policy allowing only “responsible” speech

was a content-based regulation subject to strict scrutiny).

125. In addition, “the First Amendment’s hostility to content-based regulation extends” to

“restrictions on particular viewpoints.” Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 135 S. Ct. 2218, 2230 (2015). Viewpoint

discrimination is flatly prohibited. See Iancu v. Brunetti, 139 S. Ct. 2294, 2302 (2019); Mahanoy, 141 S.

Ct. at 2046 (schools cannot “suppress speech simply because it is unpopular”).

126. Here, the District has adopted a policy that disciplines students for the content and

viewpoint of their speech. Specifically, the Policy prohibits “an intentional and/or persistent refusal

to respect a student’s gender identity.” The Policy also prohibits “misgendering,” which it defines as

instances “[w]hen a person accidentally or intentionally uses the incorrect name or pronouns to refer

- 25 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 25 of 30
to a person.” This is a classic content-based and viewpoint-based regulation of speech. See, e.g., Saxe v.

State College Area School District, 240 F.3d 200, 206 (3d Cir. 2001) (bans on “‘harassment’” covering

speech impose “‘content-based’” and often “‘viewpoint-discriminatory’” restrictions on that speech).

The District has no compelling interest in suppressing this type of student speech, and, even if it did,

the District’s restrictions are not narrowly tailored to further that interest. See Mahanoy, 141 S. Ct. at

2046; see also Willson v. City of Bel-Nor, Missouri, 924 F.3d 995, 1001 (8th Cir. 2019).

127. Linn-Mar adopted this policy “under color of state law” within the meaning of Section

1983.

COUNT IV
Violation of the First Amendment
(Overbreadth)

128. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the prior allegations in this complaint.

129. The First Amendment also prohibits the government from adopting regulations of

students that are “so broad as to chill the exercise of free speech and expression.” Dambrot v. Cent.

Michigan Univ., 55 F.3d 1177, 1182 (6th Cir. 1995). “Because First Amendment freedoms need

breathing space to survive, a state may regulate in the area only with narrow specificity.” Gooding v.

Wilson, 405 U.S. 518, 522 (1972). Schools must carefully craft their regulations “to punish only

unprotected speech and not be susceptible of application to protected expression.” Id.

130. The Policy is unconstitutionally overbroad. By its terms, the Policy applies to protected

speech. And virtually any opinion or political belief—as well as any use of humor, satire, or parody—

could be perceived as “a refusal … to respect a student’s gender identity.” The Policy also does not

differentiate between “on campus” and “off campus” speech, even though the District’s ability to

punish off-campus speech is extremely limited. See Mahanoy, 141 S. Ct. at 2046. Courts regularly find

these types of far-reaching school policies to be unconstitutionally overbroad. See, e.g., Saxe, 240 F.3d

at 215-16 (high school speech policy punishing “harassment” was overbroad because it “prohibit[ed]

- 26 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 26 of 30
a substantial amount of non-vulgar, non-sponsored student speech”); Flaherty v. Keystone Oaks School

Dist., 247 F. Supp. 2d 698, 701-02 (W.D. Penn. 2003) (speech policy prohibiting “abusive,”

“inappropriate,” and “offen[sive]” language was overbroad).

131. Linn-Mar adopted this policy “under color of state law” within the meaning of Section

1983.

COUNT V
Violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments
(Void for Vagueness)

132. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the prior allegations in this complaint.

133. “It is a basic principle of due process that an enactment is void for vagueness if its

prohibitions are not clearly defined.” Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972). “[T]he

vagueness doctrine has two primary goals: (1) to ensure fair notice to the citizenry and (2) to provide

standards for enforcement [by officials].” Ass’n of Cleveland Fire Fighters v. City of Cleveland, 502 F.3d 545,

551 (6th Cir. 2007); see also Stephenson v. Davenport Cmty. Sch. Dist., 110 F.3d 1303, 1311 (8th Cir. 1997)

(“a central purpose of the vagueness doctrine” is to prevent “arbitrary and discriminatory

enforcement”).

134. “With respect to the first goal, … ‘[a] statute which either forbids or requires the doing

of an act in terms so vague that [individuals] of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its

meaning and differ as to its application, violates the first essential of due process of law.’” Ass’n of

Cleveland Fire Fighters, 502 F.3d at 551 (quoting Connally v. Gen. Constr. Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391 (1925)).

“With respect to the second goal, … ‘if arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented,

laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply them. A vague law impermissibly delegates

basic policy matters to [officials] for resolution on an ad hoc and subjective basis.’” Id. (quoting

Grayned, 408 U.S. at 108-09).

- 27 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 27 of 30
 135. This principle of clarity is especially demanding when First Amendment freedoms are

at stake. If the challenged law “interferes with the right of free speech or of association, a more

stringent vagueness test should apply.” Village of Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc., 455

U.S. 489, 499 (1982). “Certainty is all the more essential when vagueness might induce individuals to

forego their rights of speech, press, and association for fear of violating an unclear law.” Scull v. Va.

ex rel. Comm. on Law Reform & Racial Activities, 359 U.S. 344, 353 (1959).

136. The Policy, among other things, lacks any definitions, detail, context, or notice to

students about what sorts of statements Linn-Mar views as “an intentional or persistent refusal … to

respect a student’s gender identity.” This provision guarantees arbitrary enforcement and is therefore

unconstitutional.

137. Linn-Mar adopted this policy “under color of state law” within the meaning of Section

1983.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, PDE respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and

against Defendants and provide the following relief:

A. A declaratory judgment that Defendants’ Policy violates the First and Fourteenth

Amendments;

B. A preliminary injunction barring Defendants from enforcing the Policy;

C. A permanent injunction barring Defendants from enforcing the Policy;

D. Plaintiff’s reasonable costs and expenses of this action, including attorneys’ fees, per 42

U.S.C. §1988 and all other applicable laws;

E. All other relief that Plaintiff is entitled to.

- 28 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 28 of 30
Dated: August 2, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

s/ Alan R. Ostergren

Alan R. Ostergren
Alan R. Ostergren PC
500 Locust St., Suite 199
Des Moines, IA 50309
(515) 207-0314
[email protected]

J. Michael Connolly (pro hac vice forthcoming)

James F. Hasson (pro hac vice forthcoming)
CONSOVOY MCCARTHY PLLC
1600 Wilson Blvd., Ste. 700
Arlington, VA 22209
(703) 243-9423
[email protected]
[email protected]

Counsel for Plaintiff

- 29 -
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 29 of 30
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 30 of 30
 EXHIBIT A

Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 1 of 8

7/27/22, 6:55 PM 504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes | Linn-Mar Policy Services

Home » 500 Series: Students » 504 - Student Health & Safety » 504.13 - Transgender and Students
Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes

504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding

Transgender and Students Nonconforming to
Gender Role Stereotypes
 

Transgender Procedures and Safeguards

The Iowa Civil Rights Act (Iowa Code Section 216.9) and Title IX protect transgender
students from sex and/or gender discrimination and clearly delineate that protection from
unfair practices and discriminatory acts in education, including gender identity. 

These administrative regulations set forth the district’s protocols that will be utilized to
expeditiously address the needs of transgender students, gender-expansive students,
nonbinary, gender nonconforming students, and students questioning their gender to ensure
a safe, affirming, and healthy school environment where every student can learn effectively.

These administrative regulations apply to all school activities, school-provided

transportation, and school-sponsored events regardless of where they occur.

Establishment of Gender Supports

Communication with the student and/or parent/guardian is key. Schools should make a
case-by-case determination about appropriate arrangements for transgender students
regarding names/pronouns, restroom and locker facilities, overnight accommodations on
school trips, and participation in activities. These arrangements should be based on the
student's or family’s wishes, be minimally burdensome, and be appropriate under the
circumstances.

Any student in seventh grade or older will have priority of their support plan over their
parent/guardian. All supports can be documented in a Gender Support Plan.

Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 2 of 8

policy.linnmar.k12.ia.us/policy/50413-r-administrative-regulations-regarding-transgender-and-students-nonconforming-gender 1/7
7/27/22, 6:55 PM 504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes | Linn-Mar Policy Services

Any student, regardless of how they identify, may request to meet with a school
administrator and/or school counselor to receive support from the school and implement a
Gender Support Plan. When a student and/or  parent/guardian contacts school staff about
support at school, the school will hold a meeting with the student within 10 school days of
being notified about the request for support. The student should agree with who is a part of
the meeting, including whether their parent/guardian will participate.

The Gender Support Plan will be maintained in the student’s temporary records, not the
student’s permanent records. The Linn-Mar Community School District is committed to
supporting all transgender students, gender nonconforming students, and students who are
questioning their gender. A Gender Support Plan is not required for a student to receive
supports at school. In instances where there is not a Gender Support Plan, school
administrators and/or school counselors shall work with the student to identify and
coordinate support. Support available through a Gender Support Plan, or otherwise, can
include steps appropriate to also support siblings and family members of transgender
students, gender nonconforming students, and students who are questioning their gender.
Supports being provided for transgender, gender nonconforming students, and students
who are questioning their gender will be reviewed on an annual basis or sooner, as
necessary.

Confidentiality

All persons, including students, have a right to privacy which includes the right to keep
one's transgender status private at school. Information about a student's transgender
status, legal name, or gender assigned at birth may also constitute personally identifiable
information contained in a student’s education records under the Family Educational Rights
and Privacy Act. Disclosing this information other than as allowed by law is not permitted.
Conversations between students and school counselors are protected, confidential
conversations under applicable counselor/student laws. The district shall ensure that all
information relating to student gender identity contained in student education records will be
kept confidential in accordance with applicable state, local, and federal privacy laws. The
district shall not disclose information that may reveal a student's transgender status to
others including but not limited to other students, parents, and school staff unless legally
required to do so (such as national standardized testing, drivers permits, transcripts, etc.),
or unless the student has authorized such disclosure.

Transgender and gender nonconforming students have the right to discuss and express
their gender identity and expression openly and to decide when, with whom, and how much
to share private information. The fact that a student chooses to disclose their transgender
status to school staff or other students does not authorize them to share other medical
information about the student. School staff should always check with the student first before
contacting their parent/guardian. School staff should ask the student what name and
pronouns they would like school officials to use in communications with their family. All
students under 18 years of age, or those over 18 years of age who are claimed as

Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 3 of 8

policy.linnmar.k12.ia.us/policy/50413-r-administrative-regulations-regarding-transgender-and-students-nonconforming-gender 2/7
7/27/22, 6:55 PM 504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes | Linn-Mar Policy Services

dependents by their parents/guardians for tax purposes,  should be aware that a

parent/guardian has the right to review their student’s education records under FERPA.

Names and Pronouns

Every student has the right to be addressed by a name and pronoun that corresponds to
their gender identity. A court-ordered name or gender change is not required, and the
student need not change official school records.

At the beginning of each semester, teachers may ask all students how they want to be
addressed in class and in communications with their parent/guardian. Within 10 school days
of receiving a request from a student, regardless of age, or a parent/guardian (with the
student’s consent), the district shall change a student’s name and/or gender marker in
student technology logins, email systems, student identification cards, non-legal documents
such as diplomas and awards, yearbooks, and at events such as graduation. A student may
make this request via their Gender Support Plan, if the student has requested one.

In situations wherein the district is required by law to use or to report a student’s legal name
and/or gender marker, such as for purposes of standardized testing, the building secretaries
will keep a record of the student’s legal names and this document will be kept in a locked
file for their access only. When a student transitions from one school to another, the
recording form will be shared from building secretary-to-building secretary. A student’s
Gender Support Plan will be shared either administrator-to-administrator or school
counselor-to-school counselor; depending on the student’s preference.

An intentional and/or persistent refusal by staff or students to respect a student’s gender

identity is a violation of school board policies 103.1 Anti-Bullying and Anti-Harassment,
104.1 Equal Educational Opportunity, and 104.3 Prohibition of Discrimination and/or
Harassment based on Sex Per Title IX.

Restrooms and Locker Rooms

With respect to restrooms, locker rooms, and/or changing facilities; students shall have
access to facilities that correspond to their gender identity. Buildings may maintain separate
restrooms, locker rooms, or changing facilities for male and female students provided they
allow students to access them based on their gender identity. No student shall be required
to use an all-gender or secure-access restroom, a nurse’s restroom, a privacy
partition/curtain, and/or an all-gender locker room because they are transgender, gender
nonconforming, or questioning their gender. Access to restrooms and locker rooms for
nonbinary students and students questioning their gender will be determined on a case-by-
case basis while providing students with options that allow for them to feel safest and most
included.

Regardless of gender identity, any student who is uncomfortable using a shared facility
regardless of the reason shall, upon the student's and/or a parent/guardian request, be
provided with a safe and non-stigmatizing alternative. This may include, for example,
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 4 of 8
policy.linnmar.k12.ia.us/policy/50413-r-administrative-regulations-regarding-transgender-and-students-nonconforming-gender 3/7
7/27/22, 6:55 PM 504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes | Linn-Mar Policy Services

addition of a privacy partition/curtain, provision to use a nearby private restroom/office, or a

separate changing schedule.

Dress Code

Within the constraints of the district’s student dress code policy (502.9 Student
Appearance), students may dress in accordance with their gender identity. School staff shall
not enforce a dress code more strictly against transgender and gender nonconforming
students than they do with other students.

Physical Education and Athletics

All students shall be permitted to participate in physical education classes, intramural

sports, clubs, and school events in a manner consistent with their gender identity. Students
may enroll in physical education classes that correspond with their gender identity,
correspond with their sex assigned at birth, or that are not gender-specific. As a member of
the Iowa High School Athletic Association (IHSAA) and the Iowa Girls High School Athletic
Union (IGHSAU), the district follows their policies and recommendations for transgender
athletic participation.

Overnight Trips

No student shall be denied the right to participate in an overnight fieldtrip because the
student is transgender, gender nonconforming, or questioning their gender. Students shall
be allowed to room with other students who share their gender identity or where they feel
safest and most included. Accommodations on overnight trips for nonbinary students and
students questioning their gender will be determined on a case-by-case basis with an
emphasis on providing students with options that allow for them to feel safest and most
included. No student should be forced to room by themselves because they are
transgender, gender nonconforming, or questioning their gender.

Building administration shall work with the student to determine the accommodations that
will be provided based on the particular circumstances of the trip and shall notify the student
of such accommodations in advance. With the student’s agreement, building administration
may engage the staff member supervising the trip. Overnight accommodations shall be
arranged and provided in a manner that respects the student’s desired level of
confidentiality. Building administration and/or staff shall not notify parents of other students
regarding a trans or gender nonconforming student’s housing accommodations.

Staff members should always work with a student, regardless of gender identity, to address
concerns regarding inclusion or safety and develop a plan for participation that addresses
the student’s concerns.

Records

The district and/or building shall maintain a mandatory, permanent student record that
includes a student's legal name and legal gender. However, to the extent that the district
and/or building is not legally required to use a student's legal name and gender on other
Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 5 of 8
policy.linnmar.k12.ia.us/policy/50413-r-administrative-regulations-regarding-transgender-and-students-nonconforming-gender 4/7
7/27/22, 6:55 PM 504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes | Linn-Mar Policy Services

school records or documents, the district and/or building shall use the name and gender
preferred by the student. The district and/or building will change a student's official record to
reflect a change in legal name or gender upon receipt of documentation that such change
has been made pursuant to a court order or through amendment of state or federally-issued
identification (School IDs, for example, are not legal documents and should use the
student's preferred name). In situations where school staff or administration are required by
law to use or report a transgender student's legal name or gender, such as for purposes of
standardized testing, building secretaries will keep a record of the student’s legal names
and this document will be kept in a locked file for their access only. When a student
transitions from one school to another, the recording form will be shared from building
secretary-to-building secretary. A student’s Gender Support Plan will be shared either
administrator-to-administrator or school counselor-to-school counselor; depending on the
student’s preference.

All written records related to student meetings concerning their gender identity and/or
gender transition with any staff member will be kept in a temporary file that shall be
maintained by the school counselor. The file will only be accessible to staff members that
the student has authorized in advance to do so.

Discrimination and Harassment

No student shall be denied equal access to education on the basis of their gender identity or
gender expression. Allegations involving violations of these administrative regulations shall
be reported in a manner consistent with all applicable board policies. Policies prohibiting
harassment and discrimination on the basis of sex also include harassment based on
gender identity and expression.

Media and Community Communications

When communicating to the media or community about issues related to gender identity,
the district and/or building shall have a single spokesperson to address the issue. Rather
than directly commenting on the issue, all other school staff shall direct parents and/or the
media to the designated spokesperson. Protecting the privacy of transgender and gender
nonconforming students must be a top priority for the spokesperson, as well as for all staff,
and all medical information shall be kept strictly confidential. Violating confidentiality of this
information is a violation of district procedures and may be a violation of local, state, or
federal privacy laws.

Definitions

The following definitions are provided not for the purpose of labeling students, but rather to
assist in understanding this policy and the legal obligations of school staff. Students may or
may not use these terms to describe themselves.

Affirming: Acknowledging and supporting the identity of an individual.

Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 6 of 8

policy.linnmar.k12.ia.us/policy/50413-r-administrative-regulations-regarding-transgender-and-students-nonconforming-gender 5/7
7/27/22, 6:55 PM 504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes | Linn-Mar Policy Services

Ally: A person who is not LGBTQ+ but shows support for LGBTQ+ people and promotes
equality.

Cisgender/Cis: Used to describe one whose gender identity corresponds solely with their
sex assigned at birth.

Gender Diversity: Refers to the wide range of gender identities, gender roles, and/or gender
expressions that exist.

Gender Expression: The manner in which a person represents or expresses gender to

others; often through behavior, clothing, hairstyles, activities, voice, or mannerisms.

Gender Identity: A person's deeply-held sense or psychological knowledge of their own

gender. One's gender identity can be the same or different than the gender assigned at
birth. Most people have a gender identity that matches their assigned gender at birth. For
some, however, their gender identity is different from their assigned gender. All people have
a gender identity, not just transgender people. Gender identity is an innate, largely inflexible
characteristic of each individual's personality that is generally established by age four,
although the age at which individuals come to understand and express their gender identity
may vary based on each person's social and familial social development.

Gender Nonconforming: A term for people whose gender expression differs from
stereotypical expectations, such as feminine boys, masculine girls, and those who are
perceived as androgynous. This includes people who identify outside traditional gender
categories or identify as both genders. Other terms that can have similar meanings include
gender diverse or gender expansive.

Gender Support Plan: A document that may be used to create a shared understanding
about the ways in which a student’s gender identity will be accounted for and supported at
school.

Intersex: A general term used for the many ways in which a person can be born with
chromosomes, reproductive anatomy, and/or genitalia that do not fit the typical binary
expectations of female or male.

LGBTQ+: A commonly used acronym referring to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,
and queer community. The plus sign acknowledges that there are additional identities within
the community. Other iterations include LGBTQQIA (Includes questioning, intersex, and
asexual/aromantic).

Misgendering: When a person intentionally or accidentally uses the incorrect name or

pronouns to refer to a person. Repeated or intentional misgendering is a form of bullying
and harassment.

Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 7 of 8

policy.linnmar.k12.ia.us/policy/50413-r-administrative-regulations-regarding-transgender-and-students-nonconforming-gender 6/7
7/27/22, 6:55 PM 504.13-R Administrative Regulations Regarding Transgender and Students Nonconforming to Gender Role Stereotypes | Linn-Mar Policy Services

Non-Binary Gender: Reflects gender identities that do not fit within the binary of male and
female. Individuals may identify as both genders, neither, and/or some mixture thereof.
Some terms under this umbrella include, but are not limited to, genderqueer, gender fluid,
agender, bigender, etc. Some non-binary people may use they/them/theirs or other neutral
pronouns

Outing: When someone discloses information about another person’s sexual orientation or
gender identity without that person’s knowledge and/or consent. Outing by school staff
without the student’s consent can violate the student’s privacy rights.

Pronouns: Words used to refer to someone without using their name. Common pronouns
include, but are not limited to, they/them, she/her, and he/him.

Sex Assigned at Birth: Typically, the assignment of male or female at birth by a medical
professional based on visible body parts. This binary assignment does not reflect the
natural diversity of bodies or experiences.

Sexual Orientation: The term for someone’s romantic, emotional, physical, and/or sexual
attraction to the same or different gender. Sexual orientation is distinct from gender identity.

Transgender/Trans: Individuals with a gender identity different than the sex they are
assigned at birth. Transgender can be used as an umbrella term that encompasses
diversity of gender identities and expressions. Being transgender is not dependent on
appearance, body parts, or medical procedures.

Transition: The process whereby people may change their gender expression, bodies,
and/or identity documents to match their gender identity. Transition can be social, medical,
and/or legal and is different for every individual. In children, adolescents, and adults it is
increasingly common for gender transition to be an ongoing process.

Adopted: 4/22
Related Policy (Code#): 103.1; 103.1-R; 103.1-E1-E3; 104.1; 104.1-R; 104.1-E1-E5; 104.3;
504.13
Legal Reference (Code of Iowa): 216.9 and Title IX

‹ 504.13 - Transgender and Students up 505 - Miscellaneous Matters ›

Nonconforming to Gender Role
Stereotypes

Printer-friendly version

Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-1 Filed 08/02/22 Page 8 of 8

policy.linnmar.k12.ia.us/policy/50413-r-administrative-regulations-regarding-transgender-and-students-nonconforming-gender 7/7
JS 44 (Rev. 10/20) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS
Parents Defending Education Linn-Mar Community School District, et al.

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Washington, D.C. County of Residence of First Listed Defendant Linn County, Iowa
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Alan R. Ostergren, Alan R. Ostergren PC, 500 Locust
St., Suite 199, Des Moines, IA 50309, (515) 207-0314
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
1 U.S. Government ✖ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4
of Business In This State

2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act
120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 400 State Reapportionment
150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking
151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce
152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent - Abbreviated 460 Deportation
Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR 880 Defend Trade Secrets 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud 710 Fair Labor Standards Act of 2016 (15 USC 1681 or 1692)
160 Stockholders’ Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending Act 485 Telephone Consumer
190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal 720 Labor/Management SOCIAL SECURITY Protection Act
195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations 861 HIA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV
196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/
362 Personal Injury - Product Liability 751 Family and Medical 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
Medical Malpractice Leave Act 864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 790 Other Labor Litigation 865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts
210 Land Condemnation ✖ 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: 791 Employee Retirement 893 Environmental Matters
220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act FEDERAL TAX SUITS 895 Freedom of Information
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff Act
240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence or Defendant) 896 Arbitration
245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 871 IRS—Third Party 899 Administrative Procedure
290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION 26 USC 7609 Act/Review or Appeal of
Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application Agency Decision
446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration 950 Constitutionality of
Other 550 Civil Rights Actions State Statutes
448 Education 555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
✖ 1 Original 2 Removed from 3 Remanded from 4 Reinstated or 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
42 U.S.C. §§1983, 1988
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments
VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: Yes ✖ No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
Aug. 2, 2022 /s/ Alan R. Ostergren
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP

Case 1:22-cv-00078 Document 1-2 Filed JUDGE
08/02/22 Page 1 MAG.
of 1JUDGE