A federal court has temporarily blocked the University of California (UC) from enforcing certain aspects of its anti-harassment policies related to transgender names and pronouns. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Fred W. Slaughter of California’s Central District, specifically protects members of the conservative organization Defending Education from potential punishment for referring to transgender individuals using names and pronouns that do not align with that individual’s gender identity.
This preliminary injunction is a temporary measure as the broader case against the UC system proceeds. It does not invalidate the university's full anti-harassment policy, which addresses a range of conduct including misgendering, sexual abuse, and stalking within the campus community. The ruling clarifies that UC is barred 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 their gender identity.
Judge Slaughter indicated that Defending Education is likely to succeed on its First Amendment challenge, writing that the UC policy “compels speech and is viewpoint-based.” The order, however, does not specify when commonplace use of names or pronouns might cross into abusive harassment. UC can still enforce its policy against abusive harassment related to gender; Judge Slaughter cited an example of a bully calling a boy "little princess" or "baby girl" to illustrate regulatable conduct.
Defending Education, which offers free membership and sued UC in June 2026, welcomed the decision. In a statement, the group said the injunction prevents UC from enforcing its policy against its members for referring to others using biologically accurate pronouns and names, in accordance with their sincere beliefs. Nicole Neily, president of Defending Education, welcomed the judge’s order, describing it as blocking a coercive speech policy. She stated it is unconstitutional for public universities to compel student speech, and affirmed the group's intent to defend this principle. Four student members submitted declarations in support of the case, though they are not individual plaintiffs. One UC Irvine student, identified as Student D, noted in a declaration that they often work hard to avoid pronouns or names in classes with transgender individuals.
In response, UC spokesperson Rachel Zaentz stated that the university's policy is designed to protect members of the university community from discrimination and harassment, clarifying it is not intended to regulate protected speech. Ms. Zaentz confirmed that UC takes all harassment reports seriously, including those involving gender identity, and applies consistent legal standards. She added that while the university disagrees with the court’s ruling, UC will continue to foster an environment that protects both freedom of expression and the fundamental rights of all community members.
UC’s Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy covers students, faculty, staff, and third parties, and identifies intentional and repeated misgendering as conduct that may constitute harassment.
This ruling emerges amid ongoing legal discussions nationwide and within California concerning transgender rights in educational settings. Related actions include a federal judge dismissing a challenge to school sports policies allowing transgender athletes, and a San Bernardino County judge ruling that schools cannot be forced to 'out' students but must respond to parental inquiries about a child’s gender identity.
UC’s fall 2025 enrollment records show approximately 2.2% of students identify as transgender or nonbinary, totaling about 6,600 students out of 301,000 enrolled.