Table of Contents
LAWSUIT: LGBTQ student group sues to overturn Texas A&M鈥檚 unconstitutional drag ban

HOUSTON, Texas, March 5, 2025 鈥 The FIREfiled a federal lawsuit on behalf of an LGBTQ+ student organization to block a new policy from the Texas A&M University System that bans drag performances on its 11 public campuses 鈥 a clear violation of the First Amendment.
FIRE is asking a court in the Southern District of Texas to halt Texas A&M officials from enforcing the drag ban, abruptly adopted on Friday afternoon. The lawsuit is on behalf of the Queer Empowerment Council, a coalition of student organizations at Texas A&M University-College Station and the organizers of the fifth annual 鈥淒raggieland鈥 event that was scheduled to be held on campus on March 27.
鈥淲e refuse to let Texas A&M dictate which voices belong on campus,鈥 said the Queer Empowerment Council. 鈥淒rag is self-expression, drag is discovery, drag is empowerment, and no amount of censorship will silence us.鈥
Texas A&M students first held 鈥淒raggieland鈥 (a portmanteau of 鈥淒rag鈥 and 鈥淎ggieland,鈥 a nickname for Texas A&M) at the campus theatre complex in 2020, and the event has been held on campus annually ever since. But last Friday, the Board of Regents suddenly voted to ban drag events entirely across all 11 Texas A&M campuses.
鈥淭he board finds that it is inconsistent with the system鈥檚 mission and core values of its universities, including the value of respect for others, to allow special event venues of the universities to be used for drag shows,鈥 the board鈥檚 reads. The regents also claimed that drag performances are 鈥渙ffensive鈥 and 鈥渓ikely to create or contribute to a hostile environment for women.鈥
鈥淧ublic universities can鈥檛 shut down student expression simply because the administration doesn鈥檛 like the 鈥榠deology鈥 or finds the expression 鈥榙emeaning,鈥欌 said FIREattorney Adam Steinbaugh. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 true not only of drag performances, but also religion, COVID, race, politics, and countless other topics where campus officials are too often eager to silence dissent.鈥
The regents鈥 attempts to justify the drag ban as anything other than illegal viewpoint discrimination are feeble. The board admits they want to ban drag on campus because they find it 鈥渄emeans women,鈥 鈥減romotes gender ideology,鈥 or runs contrary to their 鈥渧alues鈥濃- but the First Amendment squarely protects speech that offends and even angers others. And in all cases, it prevents campus officials from silencing speech because they disagree with the 鈥渋deology.鈥 As a taxpayer-funded university system, Texas A&M campuses cannot treat some student events differently simply because they dislike the view being expressed.
鈥淓ven putting on an on-campus production of Shakespeare or Mrs. Doubtfire, or taking part in powderpuff, could be banned at A&M if some hostile administrator thinks they 鈥榩romote gender ideology,鈥欌 said FIREsenior attorney JT Morris. 鈥淏ut if the First Amendment means anything, it鈥檚 that the government can鈥檛 silence ideologies they don鈥檛 like 鈥 real or perceived.鈥
Title IX鈥檚 prohibition on creating a 鈥渉ostile environment鈥 also does not give public universities the ability to run around the First Amendment. FIREhas long seen efforts to suppress speech on the basis that it might contribute to a 鈥渉ostile environment鈥 because someone finds it offensive, but if speech can be suppressed because someone believes it is offensive, no speech is safe. The First Amendment does not permit public universities to suppress speech because someone thinks it is inappropriate.
In order to fit the definition of harassment the Supreme Court has established, speech must be 鈥渙bjectively offensive鈥 AND 鈥渟evere鈥 AND 鈥減ervasive.鈥 A once-a-year drag show in an enclosed theatre that requires a ticket to enter doesn鈥檛 even come close to satisfying those strict conditions.
鈥淚f other students dislike or disagree with Draggieland, the solution is simple: don鈥檛 go,鈥 said FIREattorney Jeff Zeman. 鈥淥r they could organize a protest, as students opposing drag have in the past. The First Amendment protects drag and the ability to criticize drag 鈥 and it forbids the government silencing the side it disagrees with.鈥
Finally, the regents鈥 motion notes that 鈥渢here are alternative locations for such events off-campus.鈥 But that violates the First Amendment, too. The government cannot censor speech in places the First Amendment protects it, just because a speaker might express themselves elsewhere. 鈥淒raggieland鈥 highlights why that principle is so vital: if a student group can鈥檛 reach their campus community with their message, then their message can鈥檛 fulfill its purpose.
In the face of unconstitutional censorship, Draggieland organizers have remained unbowed. They have announced to supporters that they will hold an on-campus protest on Thursday and that they are committed to holding the event even if forced off-campus.
鈥淲e are committed to ensuring that our voices are heard, and that Draggieland will go on, no matter the obstacles we face,鈥 the Queer Empowerment Council .
The FIRE(果冻传媒app官方) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought鈥攖he most essential qualities of liberty. FIRErecognizes that colleges and universities play a vital role in preserving free thought within a free society. To this end, we place a special emphasis on defending the individual rights of students and faculty members on our nation鈥檚 campuses, including freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience.
CONTACT:
Alex Griswold, Communications Campaign Manager, 果冻传媒app官方: 215-717-3473; media@thefire.org
Recent Articles
FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Maine鈥檚 censure of lawmaker for post about trans student-athlete is an attack on free speech

Trump鈥檚 border czar is wrong about AOC

FIREcalls out 60 Minutes investigation as 'political stunt' in comment to FCC
