Resources
Additional Information
-
Incident Nature:
Lawsuit
-
Incident Political Orientation:
Right wing -
Incident Responses:
Litigation
State Campus Free Speech Act
Title IX or other federal statute
-
Incident Status:
In litigation Federal District Court
- Was Speech Code incident
Summary
On June 18, 2026, Defending Education, a conservative nonprofit organization that advocates for what it describes as “free speech and open debate” in education, filed a lawsuit against University of California officials in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Defending Education sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that UC’s Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment (SVSH) Policy violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The complaint challenged the policy’s “Hostile-Environment Provision” and FAQ #14, which states that the policy prohibits the “intentional or repeated use of a name or pronoun inconsistent with [an] individual’s gender identity (i.e., misgendering)” and intentionally and repeatedly calling a person by a former name, or “deadnaming.” Defending Education alleged that four of its members attend UC campuses and that the policy chilled their speech concerning gender identity and biological sex.
The complaint alleged that the Hostile-Environment Provision applies to “unwelcome” sex-based conduct that is “offensive” and “sufficiently severe, persistent or pervasive” that it limits or interferes with a person’s educational experience. It further alleged that the policy expressly covers verbal conduct involving gender, gender identity, gender expression, sex or gender stereotyping, and sexual orientation, including “derogatory names or slurs,” “offensive terms,” and “jokes.” Defending Education alleged that the policy could encompass students’ expression of views about transgender issues, including the belief that a person should use a bathroom that does not correspond with the person’s gender identity. The complaint alleged that the policy was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, imposed content- and viewpoint-based restrictions on speech, and compelled students to use names and pronouns that did not reflect their views.
The lawsuit also challenged UC’s mandatory Sexual Harassment, Anti-Discrimination, Prevention and Education (SHAPE) training, which students are required to complete annually. Defending Education alleged that the training presented scenarios involving misgendering, deadnaming, and objections to gender-identity-based access to sex-segregated facilities as harassment without providing an option for students to identify such conduct as protected expression. The complaint alleged that one UCLA student who is a Defending Education member feared discipline and self-censored because of the policy and that her student account was placed on hold after she did not complete the training. On June 24, 2026, Defending Education filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent UC from enforcing the challenged provisions while the case proceeds.
On June 27, 2026, the Daily Bruin reported that UC officials said the university developed its sexual-violence and harassment policy in accordance with state and federal law and was “committed to fostering an environment that is welcoming to all while respecting freedom of speech and expression.”
