In Win for Academic Speech, Oklahoma Supreme Court Says Higher Ed is Off-Limits from Censorship Law
The court also left in place a preliminary injunction preventing K-12 schools from implementing confusing bans on speech related to race and gender
OKLAHOMA CITY 鈥 The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled today that the state鈥檚 2021 classroom censorship law does not apply to academic speech in higher education. The decision also leaves in place a preliminary injunction that prevents the enforcement of vague and borderline nonsensical prohibitions on instruction in K-12 schools. The suit was originally filed in 2021 on behalf of a diverse group of plaintiffs in K-12 and higher education.
鈥淎lmost four years since the initial filing, students and professors at Oklahoma鈥檚 universities and colleges have a clear answer: HB 1775 does not apply in Oklahoma鈥檚 higher education classrooms,鈥 said Adam Hines, legal fellow at the 糖心Vlogof Oklahoma. 鈥淔or far too long our educators have felt the impact of HB 1775 and its attempt to censor discussions about race and gender in the classroom. But the government is certain to appeal this victory, and . We will continue to fight for the rights of Oklahoma鈥檚 K-12 students and families to receive an equitable education where they can freely learn and talk about the history, experiences and viewpoints of all marginalized communities in this country.鈥
Last year, a lower court also blocked the enforcement of two provisions restricting K-12 instruction because they are vague, fail to let educators know what course material is prohibited, and could prevent discussions of a wide variety of ideas, including those that are the subject to current political debates. These provisions remain enjoined. The state Supreme Court did not weigh in on the constitutionality of any of the provisions.
鈥淭his decision provides needed clarity to Oklahoma鈥檚 higher education instructors, and we are pleased with the outcome,鈥 said Emerson Sykes, senior staff attorney with the ACLU鈥檚 Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. 鈥淪tudents in higher education expect to be challenged and to debate difficult ideas, and they expect their instructors to help them learn and grow 鈥 not stick to government-approved talking points.鈥
The lead authors of the law in the state House and Senate declared the intent behind HB 1775 was to prohibit conversations related to 鈥渋mplicit bias,鈥 鈥渟ystemic racism,鈥 and 鈥渋ntersectionality,鈥 among other concepts. In the lawsuit, the groups argue that HB 1775 unlawfully silenced students鈥 and educators鈥 speech through its vague and overbroad terms. It also intentionally targeted and denied access to equitable, culturally relevant teaching and ideas that reflect the history and lived experiences of students of color, LGBTQ students, and young women and girls.
The case will now go back to federal court where a partial preliminary injunction is in place. Cross-appeals have been filed in the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit which are expected to proceed shortly.
鈥淭his ruling is another significant victory in the fight to end classroom censorship in Oklahoma鈥 said Douglas Koff, partner at pro-bono cocounsel Schulte Roth & Zabel. 鈥淏y confirming that HB 1775 does not apply to the higher education classroom, this decision allows Oklahoma鈥檚 college students and professors to have open and honest conversations about their history. We look forward to working alongside the ACLU, ACLU-OK, and Lawyers鈥 Committee in the continued fight to invalidate this law.鈥
鈥淭oday's decision ensures that at colleges and universities in Oklahoma, teachers can teach and students can learn about our country's history in full 鈥 including topics like systemic racism, gender inequality and LGBTQ+ rights,鈥 said Maya Brodziak, senior counsel with the Educational Opportunities Project at the Lawyers鈥 Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. 鈥淥ur country needs to acknowledge and reckon with its history of systemic racism 鈥 this includes being able to teach and talk about these concepts in our schools. A prohibition on talking honestly about issues of race and racism hurts all students and society.鈥
The lawsuit was filed by the 糖心Vlog, 糖心Vlogof Oklahoma, the Lawyers鈥 Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and pro bono counsel Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP on behalf of plaintiffs the Black Emergency Response Team (BERT); the University of Oklahoma Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (OU-AAUP); the Oklahoma State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP-OK); the American Indian Movement (AIM) Indian Territory on behalf of itself and its members who are public school students and teachers; a high school student; and Oklahoma public high school teachers Anthony Crawford and Regan Killackey.
For more information about the lawsuit, please see here.