New York Attorney General Letitia James is currently embroiled in a federal lawsuit following the issuance of guidance in May 2025, which cautioned school board members against making statements that could be perceived as demeaning towards LGBTQ+ students. The lawsuit, initiated by Massapequa Union Free School District Board Chair Kerry Wachter and other local officials, is a direct response to what they perceive as an unlawful restriction of speech on crucial policy issues, particularly those concerning student access to locker rooms and participation in athletics.
The contentious guidance letter was explicit in its warning that school board members could face removal for remarks or actions that "demean and stigmatize LGBTQ+ students," including the misuse of pronouns or permitting any form of bullying or harassment directed at LGBT students. The New York Sun reported that the letter provided examples such as resistance to LGBT student groups and objections to trans-identifying students using facilities that correspond with their gender identity.
In an interview with Fox News Digital, as reported by RedState, Wachter expressed her concerns that the guidance had compelled her to restrict public commentary during board meetings. This limitation, she argued, hindered students from voicing their privacy concerns. Wachter highlighted that some students were uncomfortable sharing locker rooms with biological males, despite the availability of gender-neutral facilities.
The lawsuit, filed in collaboration with the Southeastern Legal Foundation, asserts that the guidance infringes upon the First Amendment. Kim Hermann, an attorney with the foundation, emphasized that the rights of students to discuss their concerns were being suppressed, and that Wachter now risks removal from her elected position for allowing these discussions.
James' guidance also characterized school board meetings as "limited public fora," advising members to refrain from using the platform to express "personal or political grievances." The guidance referenced state laws, including the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA), which is designed to prevent harassment and bullying. According to the guidance, board members could be removed by the state education commissioner for violations of laws, neglect of duties, or disobedience to orders from the Regents or commissioner.
Critics of the guidance, such as former Manhattan district attorney candidate Maud Maron, argue that it constitutes an overreach and poses a threat to the public discussion of school policies, especially those that affect the privacy of girls in school facilities. Maron described the guidance as a "clear attempt to silence discussion on sensitive issues affecting women and girls in schools."
The office of Attorney General James has maintained that the guidance was intended to clarify state laws that protect LGBT students. However, this lawsuit follows a recent federal ruling that blocked James from pursuing legal action against faith-based pregnancy centers, a decision that upheld First Amendment protections for speech on morally and religiously motivated topics.
Legal experts suggest that the outcome of this case could establish a precedent for how state authorities may regulate school board conduct while respecting constitutional rights to free speech. The case also raises broader questions about the role of state attorneys general in local school governance.
By issuing guidance that could potentially lead to the removal of elected school board members, James has disrupted the typical policy debate at school board meetings. This has sparked a conversation about the limits of state intervention and the protection of community voices in the educational policy-making process.
The lawsuit underscores the tension between enforcing student protections and preserving the ability of school officials to engage in policy discussions without fear of retaliation.
