The lawsuit seeks to halt enforcement of the ban. It was filed on behalf of the Queer Empowerment Council.

BREAKING: The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Queer Empowerment Council, the student organization that hosts and organizes Draggieland. Last week, the Board of Regents passed a resolution banning on-campus drag events.

— The Battalion (@TheBattOnline) March 5, 2025

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression has filed a federal lawsuit against Texas A&M after the Board of Regents banned on-campus drag shows last week. FIRE is asking a court to halt enforcement of the ban. https://t.co/fFfoMY898v

— The Battalion (@TheBattOnline) March 5, 2025

Edit: Added link to Batt article.

We want to sue you so dudes can prance around in women's clothing on a stage, hopefully encouraging more people to do the same.

My honest response if I was in a position to issue one...."I don't even know what to say to that other than no, and go away!"

The case has not been assigned to a judge yet, but I won't be surprised if A&M ultimately loses his case

The ban is very vaguely written on terms of what constitutes a drag show, (and I have a suspicion it was purposely done that way to set up a loss)

People said WT would lose and Wendler would be out for this same thing a few years ago but here we are.

Would love to know who funds FIRE. USAID funds laundered multiple times is near the top of my list.

AgCat93 said:

---

Would love to know who funds FIRE. USAID funds laundered multiple times is near the top of my list.

---

Logging companies and their kindlings.

AgCat93 said:

---

Would love to know who funds FIRE. USAID funds laundered multiple times is near the top of my list.

---

Waiting for Global Warming to respond

Steadfast men! We are going to take the Brits by surprise! We will fight for our God-given right to dress like women! In the future, scientists may discover a way for us to take drugs so our bodies can grow boobies and then we will fight to get tampons in our bathrooms!

AgCat93 said:

---

Would love to know who funds FIRE. USAID funds laundered multiple times is near the top of my list.

---

this,

That said, IMHO, i don't know if Tamu can win this one.

TommyBrady said:

---

People said WT would lose and Wendler would be out for this same thing a few years ago but here we are.

---

Haven't heard anything from this in a while. Preliminary injunction against Wendler was denied, oral arguments were given before 5th circuit in May, 2024. But no ruling that I see online.

Maybe legal beagles can find a ruling.

https://dallasexpress.com/state/court-hears-oral-arguments-on-campus-drag-show-ban/

No one is saying they can't have it just not on campus. I really don't give a *****

Even if they win against TAMU, I don't give a *****

Gay.

rca21978 said:

---

The lawsuit seeks to halt enforcement of the ban. It was filed on behalf of the Queer Empowerment Council.

---

An entertainment venue on campus is a privilege, not a right.

Weirdo Central Command - thats not in any more! not with Trump in office, why do groups like that always have to be the loudest? USAid?

A&M will most likely lose this case as this infringes on the freedom of expression of some students. The Equal Protection Clause will most likely be argued as the decision discriminates against one group of people in favor of another (Woman vs Drag). Especially as the Board of Regents used "likely to create or contribute to a hostile environment for women" as their reasoning.

There is also a precedent in this case with Southern Utah Drag Stars v. the City of St. George being ruled on in February. The court "recognized that the protections of the First Amendment extend to drag performances".

I personally do not agree with these performances being on campus', but from a constitutional standpoint they are legally protected.

I used to love FIRE. I'm guessing they got co-opted by the left.

However, allowing some groups to have events but denying others due to gender identity falls under the Equal Protection Clause as that is discrimination.

Discrimination is the process of making unfair or prejudicial distinctions between people based on the groups, classes, or other categories to which they belong or are perceived to belong, such as race, gender, age, class, religion, or sexual orientation.

So in this case the board cannot deny them with the reasoning they gave.

P.H. Dexippus said:

---

I used to love FIRE. I'm guessing they got co-opted by the left.

---

No, they just sometimes defend causes that you don't like. That's what happens when you support the First Amendment.

I'm pretty sure TAMU has the backing of the POTUS and the majority of the US on this topic.

Go ahead make your lawyers rich...

CanyonAg77 said:

---

TommyBrady said:

---

People said WT would lose and Wendler would be out for this same thing a few years ago but here we are.

---

Haven't heard anything from this in a while. Preliminary injunction against Wendler was denied, oral arguments were given before 5th circuit in May, 2024. But no ruling that I see online.

Maybe legal beagles can find a ruling.

https://dallasexpress.com/state/court-hears-oral-arguments-on-campus-drag-show-ban/

---

Nope, what you have is the most recent information. No ruling from the 5th circuit yet.

So whens the next blackface comedy skit or a lets go hunt down the Jews parade? If you cant protect women (Sex characteristic, you know, a real protected characteristic unlike the made up gender one) against discrimination you might as well go for the race and all the others on top. Your freedom of speech doesn't guarantee that you have to be allowed to disparage others in a campus owned venue when you are creating another violation in the process.

"These events often involve unwelcome and objectively offensive conduct based on sex for many members of the respective communities of the universities, particularly when they involve the mockery or objectification of women."

agwrestler said:

---

I'm pretty sure TAMU has the backing of the POTUS and the majority of the US on this topic.

Go ahead make your lawyers rich...

---

None of those matter. It's the nine sitting at SCOTUS that matter.

TheRealJacob said:

---

However, allowing some groups to have events but denying others due to gender identity falls under the Equal Protection Clause as that is discrimination.

Discrimination is the process of making unfair or prejudicial distinctions between people based on the groups, classes, or other categories to which they belong or are perceived to belong, such as race, gender, age, class, religion, or sexual orientation.

So in this case the board cannot deny them with the reasoning they gave.

---

I'm not sure it applies here, as not all Drag Queens consider themselves trans. In fact, I would wager that most do not.

There's no other place for these people to do this? Why on campus other than to cause a big scene that's screams "Look at me."

Irrelevant. It's not the government's place to decide what they deem acceptable for allowing others to use their facilities.

AgCat93 said:

---

Would love to know who funds FIRE. USAID funds laundered multiple times is near the top of my list.

---

• Bradley Foundation: A major funder of FIRE
• Sarah Scaife Foundation: A major funder of FIRE
• Charles Koch Institute: A major funder of FIRE
• Hugh M. Hefner Foundation: A donor to FIRE
• #StartSmall: A philanthropic initiative from Jack Dorsey that supports FIRE
• Knight Foundation: A center-left donor to FIRE
• Bloomberg Philanthropies: A donor to FIRE
• John Templeton Foundation: Donated $2.5 million to FIRE in 2016
• J. P. Humphreys Foundation: Donated $1.15 million to FIRE in 2019
• Charles Koch Foundation: Donated $1 million to FIRE in 2019

Several conservative/libertarian foundations on that list. A google search would have shown you that.

Quote:

---

The Equal Protection Clause will most likely be argued as the decision discriminates against one group of people in favor of another (Woman vs Drag).

---

There is no equal protection claim in the lawsuit

HTownAg98 said:

---

Irrelevant. It's not the government's place to decide what they deem acceptable for allowing others to use their facilities.

---

I know that. My question was can't they do their thing off campus? What's the purpose of doing on campus, again, other than to cause a scene. What's the benefit for them?

You answered your own question

So, they are just looking to cause a scene. Should have attended tu instead where I'm sure they would be more appreciated.

nu awlins ag said:

---

So, they are just looking to cause a scene. Should have attended tu instead where I'm sure they would be more appreciated.

---

All they wanted to do was get married, remember?

The whole point is disrupting the norm, so they're in the absolute perfect place.

We're queer and you will accept us! You will march in our parades and fly our flag!!!

Just so I'm clear....

Campus allows Richard Spencer to speak and we have no issue.
It's the guys dressed as women that are the cause for alarm.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

nu awlins ag said:

---

So, they are just looking to cause a scene. Should have attended tu instead where I'm sure they would be more appreciated.

---

All they wanted to do was get married, remember?

The whole point is disrupting the norm, so they're in the absolute perfect place.

We're queer and you will accept us! You will march in our parades and fly our flag!!!

---

You were forced to march in their parade and fly their flag?

I bet not

nu awlins ag said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Irrelevant. It's not the government's place to decide what they deem acceptable for allowing others to use their facilities.

---

I know that. My question was can't they do their thing off campus? What's the purpose of doing on campus, again, other than to cause a scene. What's the benefit for them?

---

Why does anyone do anything on Campus? Why does the film club use a room at the Blocker building at night to screen films instead of renting out the local Cinemark? Why do student groups meet in Rudder tower when they could rent out a ballroom at the Hilton?

Why do students want to do things in spaces at the campus they attend and pay for instead of paying for private off-campus space? It boggles the mind really.

FIRE is useless.

They refused to offer any sort of assistance when it come to COVID nonsense policies I had to deal with.