Supreme Court refuses to protect a teacher’s right to conservative speech on social media, allowing her termination to stand despite Justice Thomas’s strong objections to the decision.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court declined to hear the case of Kari MacRae, a teacher fired over social media posts expressing conservative views on transgenderism and immigration.
- Justice Clarence Thomas criticized lower courts for misapplying First Amendment precedents, suggesting they undervalued MacRae’s constitutional rights.
- MacRae’s TikTok posts were made before her employment at Hanover Public Schools, but were used as grounds for termination.
- The case highlights growing concerns about conservative educators’ ability to express personal political opinions without facing professional consequences.
- The decision represents a missed opportunity to clarify First Amendment protections for public employees with conservative viewpoints.
Court Declines to Hear Conservative Teacher’s Free Speech Case
In a troubling development for conservative educators across America, the Supreme Court has declined to hear arguments in the case of Kari MacRae, a teacher who claims she was fired over social media posts expressing her views on transgender issues, immigration, and other controversial topics. The decision leaves in place lower court rulings that permitted her termination, effectively allowing public schools to punish teachers for expressing conservative viewpoints on social media, even when those posts were made before their employment began. This case highlights the growing double standard in how free speech is protected in educational settings.
“The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear arguments in a case involving a teacher who claims she was fired over social media posts expressing her views on transgenderism, immigration, and other controversial issues,” said Justice Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court Justice
Justice Thomas Voices Strong Concerns
Despite the court’s decision not to take up the case, Justice Clarence Thomas made his objections clear. Thomas criticized the lower courts for their approach to the case, stating they had misapplied First Amendment precedents when dealing with controversial political speech. He expressed particular concern about the First Circuit Court’s handling of the case, suggesting that it severely undervalued MacRae’s First Amendment rights in favor of the school district’s interests. His dissent signals growing recognition among conservative justices that traditional American values are increasingly being pushed out of public education.
MacRae’s legal strategy may have contributed to the Supreme Court’s reluctance to hear the case. Rather than working within the existing balancing test for public employee speech, which weighs employee free speech rights against government employer interests, MacRae argued that this test should not apply at all. This approach would have required the Court to overturn or significantly modify previous decisions, a step the justices were unwilling to take despite the clear First Amendment issues at stake.
“The Supreme Court’s decision not to take up her case is a missed opportunity to uphold the First Amendment,” said Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch
Circumstances of MacRae’s Termination
The facts of the case reveal a troubling pattern of anti-conservative bias. MacRae was fired after school administrators discovered TikTok videos she had posted before being hired at Hanover Public Schools. These videos expressed her opposition to critical race theory being taught in schools and her views on transgender issues. Despite these posts being made before her employment and on her personal social media account, the school district terminated her, claiming her views made her unfit to teach. This raises serious questions about whether conservatives are being systematically pushed out of education.
MacRae sued the school district for violating her First Amendment rights, but both the district court and the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against her. The First Circuit’s application of the public employee speech doctrine prioritized the school’s interest in maintaining what they deemed an appropriate educational environment over MacRae’s constitutional right to express her personal political views. This ruling effectively allows public schools to create ideological litmus tests for teachers, where only those who conform to progressive viewpoints are welcome.
Implications for Conservative Educators
The Supreme Court’s decision not to hear MacRae’s case sends a chilling message to conservative educators across the country: your personal views, even those expressed before employment, can be grounds for termination if they don’t align with progressive orthodoxy. While the Court employs a balancing test that ostensibly weighs competing interests, such as student safety against employee free speech rights, this case illustrates how that balance is increasingly tilted against conservative viewpoints. As President Trump works to restore American values in education, cases like MacRae’s highlight the urgent need for stronger protections for ideological diversity in our schools.
MacRae’s political career continues despite this setback. She has previously run unsuccessfully for the Massachusetts state Senate twice and plans to run again in 2026. Her persistence reflects the determination of many conservatives who refuse to be silenced despite facing institutional opposition. As the legal battle over free speech in educational settings continues, MacRae’s case serves as an important reminder of the ongoing challenges faced by conservatives in exercising their constitutional rights in today’s increasingly politicized educational environment.
