A federal judge in California has temporarily barred the University of California (UC) system from disciplining members of a conservative advocacy group for using names and pronouns that do not align with a transgender individual’s gender identity. The ruling, issued on Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Fred W. Slaughter, restricts the enforcement of certain provisions of UC’s anti-harassment policy related to misgendering.
The preliminary injunction applies specifically to members of Defending Education, a group that offers free memberships and is the sole plaintiff in the case. The judge found that the group is likely to succeed in its First Amendment claim, stating that UC’s policy “compels speech and is viewpoint-based.” The injunction prevents the university from penalizing Defending Education members for referring to someone “in a commonplace way” using pronouns or birth names consistent with their sex assigned at birth, even if inconsistent with the individual’s gender identity. However, the ruling does not clarify when such usage crosses the line into abusive harassment.
UC’s Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy prohibits intentional and repeated misgendering, classifying such behavior as potential harassment. The policy protects students, faculty, staff, and third parties, including visitors and contractors. UC spokesperson Rachel Zaentz emphasized that the policy is meant to guard against discrimination and harassment, not to regulate protected speech, and reaffirmed the university’s commitment to enforcing legal standards for all harassment reports. “While we disagree with the court’s ruling, UC will continue to foster a welcoming environment that balances freedom of expression with the rights of all community members,” Zaentz said.
Judge Slaughter distinguished between protected speech and harassment by citing examples such as bullying remarks like calling a boy “little princess” or “baby girl,” which UC may continue to regulate. Defending Education’s president Nicole Neily described the injunction as a victory against a “coercive speech policy” and asserted that public universities cannot compel student speech. “We will continue to defend this principle in California and elsewhere as needed,” Neily stated.
The case emerges amid heightened national debate over transgender rights in education. Recent legal decisions have both challenged and upheld transgender-inclusive policies—such as California’s defense of transgender athletes' rights to compete on sports teams corresponding with their gender identity. A separate ruling in San Bernardino County held that schools cannot force students to be publicly identified as transgender but must respond to parents’ inquiries about their children’s gender identity.
According to UC enrollment data from fall 2025, approximately 2.2% of students, or about 6,600 individuals, identify as transgender or nonbinary out of a total student population of roughly 301,000. In declarations submitted during the lawsuit, some UC students described the challenges of navigating classrooms and groups with transgender peers while adhering to personal beliefs about pronoun usage.
The preliminary injunction remains in place as the litigation continues, with broader implications for university anti-harassment policies and First Amendment rights within educational institutions.