Court rules against anti-trans Christian teacher who demanded right to misgender students

An appeals court ruled that Kimberly Polk's religious beliefs didn't give her license to ignore district policy or harm trans kids

This newsletter is free and goes out to over 23,000 subscribers, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe or use my usual Patreon page!

---

In 2020, Kimberly Ann Polk applied to become a substitute teacher in the Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland. She was hired in 2021 with the understanding that she could be called to fill in anywhere in the district, and there were no complaints about her performance that first year. She did the job and planned to keep doing it.

When the 2022-2023 school year began, she had to complete some basic training modules online, including one that reminded subs of the school board’s policies. One of them concerned transgender students: The board policy made clear that all teachers should respect students’ gender identities, use their preferred names and pronouns, and keep that information confidential like they would any medical issues.

Polk refused to e-sign the paperwork that said she accepted the policy. She cited her “sincerely held religious beliefs… based on her understanding of her Christian religion and the Holy Bible.”

Trans flag (image via Adobe Spark)

So she asked for some kind of religious accommodation. When speaking with a district staffer about that, one possibility was that she could only substitute teach in lower grades where this might not be an issue, but that accommodation was ultimately rejected by the district. (As it should have been. After all, substitute teachers shouldn’t get to tell the district which schools or grades or students they want to work with.)

Because of her refusal to treat trans kids with respect, Polk didn’t work as a sub that year or the following year. Instead, in May of 2024, she sued the district. She claimed they violated her civil rights by not granting her religious accommodation and impeding her right to free speech and free exercise of religion.

Through a series of technical legal issues, this case ended up in front of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, and a three-judge panel recently ruled against her. And the decision is glorious for its utter contempt of her arguments.

In the majority ruling, the appeals court said that “no one forced Polk to become a substitute teacher in Montgomery County” and added that by accepting her position, she agreed to follow policies set by the school board.

“Be it choosing curriculum or placing administrative requirements on how teachers deliver that curriculum, those decisions are entrusted to the Board, not to judges,” King wrote. “And it is the Board — not individual teachers — which is democratically responsive. If, as Polk says, teachers and parents disagree with the Guidelines, then democratic means exist to address their concerns.”

The court said that the board’s policies are neutral with regards to religion. After all, the judges wrote, plenty of Christians affirm trans people and plenty of non-Christians are bigots:

… [Just] because Polk herself is a Christian who believes that there are only two sexes does not mean that all Christians believe the same thing, and that non-Christians inherently believe otherwise. Indeed, there are multiple secular reasons why other persons, regardless of their religious background or creed, could take issue with the Guidelines.

Furthermore, she chose to work there. No one was forcing her to be a sub in that district. If she doesn’t like their policies, she can find work elsewhere or oust the board members in the next election in favor of conservative Christian candidates who believe their role is to make kids’ lives miserable. For now, though, all she’s doing is admitting she’s not capable of doing the job.

As far as free speech goes, teachers working for a school district don’t have some magical right to say whatever they want in the classroom like they can in their personal lives. So no one’s abridging her right to free speech just because she insists on using someone’s birth name to showcase her Christian dickishness.

In a mic drop moment, the majority added, “we readily decline Polk’s invitation to run the public schools.”

The one dissenting judge, a Republican appointee, said that Polk’s free speech rights were indeed violated and the school district could have accommodated her by allowing her to use all students’ last names. But in a bizarre tangent, that judge argued that telling teachers to used someone’s preferred pronouns was akin to making them repeat political messages:

Can the state force an Israeli teacher to wear a pro-Palestine pin? Can the state force a Quaker math teacher to start class with a statement expressing her support for U.S. military strikes abroad? Can the state force an atheist teacher to recite the pledge of allegiance with the words “under God”?… Can the state force an independent teacher to profess to students her support for incumbent elected officials? Under the majority’s view, the only logical conclusion is yes.

Respecting students’ names/pronouns isn’t a political opinion, though. It’s basic decency. And the board has every right to ask staffers to treat students with respect.

That’s why this is a welcome decision. In the face of right-wing outrage over All Things Transgender, we can celebrate a victory that says a Christian substitute teacher has no right to insist on misgendering children because her religion requires her to be an asshole to them.

Both sides reacted to the decision with predictable responses—Polk’s side wants to keep fighting this while the school district just wants to move on and return to the business of educating children.

Polk’s attorney, Rick Claybrook, said Friday that they are considering requesting that the Supreme Court or the full 4th Circuit review the decision.

Montgomery County Public Schools spokeswoman Liliana López said in a statement that the school system welcomes the court’s decision but declined to comment further because there could be additional litigation.

Interestingly enough, when this case was originally filed, Claybrook insisted the school district was prejudiced against conservative Christians:

Claybrook told MoCo360 Monday the lawsuit boils down to “MCPS is saying that they don’t want anyone with traditional religious beliefs—certainly beliefs [that] the parents are the ones to make important life decisions for their minor children—to be working at the school.”

“That’s very troubling,” he said.

That’s precisely the argument the appellate court shot down with their decision. The school district has no problem hiring conservative Christians, but all employees have to abide by district policy. You’re in their house; you have to do what they say. His client wanted special bigot privileges, which were rightly rejected.

Ultimately, this isn’t about religious liberty or government overreach. It was yet another demand from a conservative Christian that her personal prejudice be affirmed. She refused to do the most basic thing a teacher can do: treat her students with dignity.

The district never demanded she agree that trans people are people or that she had to stop being Christian when she entered a school. They just needed her to do the bare minimum and she couldn’t do it. And she has no right to demand the school district give her a job that she’s clearly unfit to do.

Just because she wants to use her classrooms to wage a culture war battle doesn’t mean everyone needs to go along with it. The district was right not to accommodate her demand for hate. If she had problems with it, there were plenty of places to vent her frustrations. I’m sure her church would love to hear all about it.

No teacher—substitute or otherwise—has the right to make a child’s school day more painful in the name of her religion. If that disqualifies Polk from the classroom, it’s not because of a failed policy. It’s because she can’t do the job.

---