![\"\"](\"https:\/\/d2eehagpk5cl65.cloudfront.net\/img\/q60\/uploads\/2025\/04\/GenderQueerCover-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
From the April 10 decision by Judge Bernard Jones (W.D. Okla.) in Boismier v. Walters<\/em><\/a>:<\/p>\n This action stems from certain public statements made by Defendant Ryan Walters during his tenure as Oklahoma’s Secretary of Education. {After making the statements underlying this action, Walters was elected as Oklahoma’s Superintendent of Public Instruction and assumed that office in 2023.} Plaintiff Summer Boismier, the target of Walters’s remarks, maintains that these statements amounted to actionable defamation….<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The court recounts the following undisputed facts:<\/p>\n In May 2021, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt signed House Bill 1775 (H.B. 1775) into law…. [T]he law prohibits Oklahoma schools from teaching certain concepts related to race and sex. Unsurprisingly, its enactment sparked significant public controversy and debate, one in which Boismier would later become entangled.<\/p>\n At the time of H.B. 1775’s enactment, Boismier was a high school English teacher for Norman Public Schools in Oklahoma. On the first day of the 2022\u20132023 school year, her students arrived to find the classroom bookshelves covered in red butcher paper with a handwritten message that said: “Books the state doesn’t want you to read.”<\/p>\n A QR code affixed to the paper directed students to the Brooklyn Public Library’s “Books Unbanned” project, which, upon obtaining a digital library card, provides access to books\u2014like Gender Queer<\/em> and Flamer<\/em>\u2014that Oklahoma schools have removed in response to H.B. 1775. Before the first day of class, Boismier posted photos of her classroom setup to her public Twitter account, accompanied by a message referencing H.B. 1775 and noting that Oklahoma leadership had labeled the covered books\u2014particularly those by “BIPOC, LGBTQ+, and\/or gender non-conforming authors”\u2014as “pornography” and “indoctrination.” She later admitted that her decision to provide the QR code was in response to incendiary comments by Walters about Gender Queer.<\/em><\/p>\n {Sometime before July 28, 2022, Walters discovered that Gender Queer<\/em> and Flamer<\/em> were accessible to students in Tulsa Public Schools and posted images from the books\u2014describing them as “inappropriate sexual material”\u2014on Facebook. When Facebook quickly removed his post, Walters expressed displeasure that the site had “higher standards than … Tulsa Public Schools.” And Walters was not alone in criticizing the availability of Gender Queer<\/em> and Flamer<\/em> in Oklahoma public schools. On July 27, 2022, then-Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister publicly condemned “the presence of two obscene graphic novels potentially available in Tulsa Public Schools.” In her written statement, Hofmeister described the novels as “inappropriate, sexually explicit material” and “pornography that does not belong in any public school library.”}<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n <\/span><\/p>\n After a concerned parent complained to school officials about Boismier’s classroom setup, the school removed her to investigate. Within days, she resigned.<\/p>\n Boismier’s resignation was swiftly followed by a series of [local and national] news stories … covering her departure from Norman Public Schools and opposition to H.B. 1775 (along with the Oklahoma politicians who supported it)…. In them, Boismier was directly quoted as saying:<\/p>\n On August 26, 2022, KOKH Fox 25 published another story on Boismier, this time featuring the perspective of a concerned mother. The mother explained that after scanning the Brooklyn Public Library QR code her daughter had received from Boismier, it directed her to the book Gender Queer. <\/em>Deeply unsettled by the book’s content, the mother characterized it as “pornographic material” and insisted that Boismier “should have criminal charges against her.” The following are excerpts from Gender Queer<\/em>:<\/p>\n This all leads to the challenged statements underlying this defamation action. Boismier alleged that … Walters posted a letter to Twitter containing several “false or misleading statements” about her, including that she had (1) “been fired from her teaching position with the Norman Public Schools,” (2) “distributed pornography to students, which would have been a serious and disturbing crime,” and (3) “caused harm and shame to the entire profession of teachers by sexualizing her classroom.” She further alleged that in a follow-up letter posted to Twitter, Walters falsely asserted that she had instead “resigned rather than face removal.” …<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The court held that Boismier was a “limited purpose public figure”:<\/p>\n Boismier did not speak out as a private figure swept unwillingly into a public controversy; she “voluntarily inject[ed]” herself to the forefront of debate over H.B. 1775 and its impact on classrooms like hers. Before Walters’s tweets, Boismier had already transformed her classroom into a visible protest against H.B. 1775 and posted about it on Twitter\u2014by her own admission, motivated by Walters’s commentary on Gender Queer.<\/em> Then, on the heels of her resignation, she actively facilitated media coverage of her departure from teaching and opposition to H.B. 1775, providing direct quotes to numerous outlets and offering extended commentary in at least two question-and-answer interviews. Finally, on the very day Walters tweeted about her, she appeared in an Oklahoma daily newspaper to voice further frustrations about H.B. 1775 and call for change in local schools. There can be little doubt that Boismier actively used the media as a vehicle to influence public sentiment regarding H.B. 1775’s effect on education in Oklahoma. And the Court finds that this conduct rendered her a limited-purpose public figure on the issue of H.B. 1775’s interplay with her teaching career in Oklahoma….<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Because she was a limited purpose public figure, she had to show (by clear and convincing evidence) that Walters spoke with “actual malice,” which is to say knowing that the statements were false or were likely false. The court held she couldn’t do that as to Walters’ erroneous initial statement that she had been fired:<\/p>\n [T]he Court finds that Boismier has failed to present sufficient evidence from which a rational finder of fact could conclude, by clear and convincing evidence, that Walters acted with actual malice. To be sure, Walters often engages in pointed and provocative rhetoric\u2014particularly when responding to those he perceives as opposing his agenda. One need look no further than the news stories cited in Boismier’s response. In one, Walters is recently described as linking the 2025 terrorist attack in New Orleans, Louisiana, to educational instruction in public schools.<\/p>\n But what is lacking from Boismier is any genuine explanation of how Walters’s post-August 2022 conduct\u2014some of which occurred as recently as 2025\u2014establishes that he spoke with actual malice when stating that Boismier had been terminated. To the extent this history suggests some degree of “ill will, hatred or a desire to injure” Boismier, that alone “is not enough to establish actual malice.” …<\/p>\n [Boismier] insists that his failure to make even minimal efforts to verify whether she had, in fact, been terminated amounts to reckless disregard for the truth. Perhaps a more responsible or reasonable public official would have\u2014and as a matter of public trust, should have\u2014done more to verify his claim before taking to Twitter. But that failure, standing alone, does not warrant a jury trial. Notably, too, when Walters was advised later that same day that his statement was incorrect, he … promptly issued a revised letter clarifying that Boismier had resigned. This further weighs against an inference of actual malice….<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The court also held that Boismier couldn’t show knowing or reckless falsehood as to “Walters’s statement that Boismier provided her students access to banned and pornographic material”:<\/p>\n Walters argues as a threshold matter that this statement was “reasonable and … substantially true,” and while the Court is hesitant to wade into the murky waters of what is and isn’t pornographic material, it cannot ignore that the imagery in Gender Queer<\/em> arguably lends itself to such a characterization. At least in the context of child pornography, the Supreme Court has loosely defined the term as “sexually explicit visual portrayals that feature children.” S<\/em>ee also Pornography<\/em>, Black’s Law Dictionary (12th ed. 2024) (defining “pornography” as “[m]aterial (such as writings, photographs, or movies) depicting sexual activity or erotic behavior in a way that is designed to arouse sexual excitement,” while acknowledging that the term is “notoriously difficult to define”). And while the images from Gender Queer<\/em> may not include children, they do appear to depict graphic sexual activity.<\/p>\n But even assuming Walters’s statement is one of verifiable fact\u2014and even if an infallible arbiter were to conclude that Gender Queer<\/em> does not meet the definition of pornographic material\u2014the closeness of the question weighs heavily against a finding of actual malice. Where the line between what is and isn’t pornographic is so imprecise, the Court has trouble concluding that Walters’s characterization, however controversial, reflects an inference of known falsity or a reckless disregard for the truth. This is especially so when others, including Oklahoma’s then-Superintendent of Public Instruction, were denouncing the book in the same way.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n And the court concluded that Walters’s statement that Boismier “caused such harm and shame to the entire profession” is opinion and thus can’t be actionable:<\/p>\n [Walters’s statement] lacks specificity or precision, offers no concrete claim about what harm was caused or how the profession as a whole was impacted, and is not verifiable in any objective sense. It reflects, instead, Walters’s rhetorical judgment about a public controversy in which both he and Boismier were outspoken participants. And in the broader context of political discourse surrounding H.B. 1775, the remark reads as subjective commentary, not a factual assertion susceptible to defamation liability. Indeed, the Court can only imagine what a trial would look like testing whether the teaching profession, in fact, felt “shame,” and whether Boismier was the one who caused it….<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n David R. Gleason (Moricoli Kellogg & Gleason PC) represents Walters.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The post Court Dismisses Oklahoma Teacher's Libel Suit Against State Official, Stemming from Debate Over "Gender Queer" in School Libraries<\/a> appeared first on Reason.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" From the April 10 decision by Judge Bernard Jones (W.D. Okla.) in Boismier v. Walters: This action stems from certain…\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/d2eehagpk5cl65.cloudfront.net\/img\/q60\/uploads\/2025\/04\/BoismiervWaltersGenderQueer1-1024x385.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/d2eehagpk5cl65.cloudfront.net\/img\/q60\/uploads\/2025\/04\/BoismiervWaltersGenderQueer2-1024x397.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\nThe post Court Dismisses Oklahoma Teacher's Libel Suit Against State Official, Stemming from Debate Over "Gender Queer" in School Libraries appeared first on Reason.com. …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"tdm_status":"","tdm_grid_status":""},"categories":[19,9],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114498"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=114498"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114498\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=114498"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=114498"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/3rdcitynews.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=114498"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}