Skip to main content
The Latest /
Trump Judges

Trump Judges Cast Deciding Votes to Allow School District Employees to Continue Case Protesting Equity Training

A gavel sitting on a table.

“Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears” is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trump’s judges on Americans’ rights and liberties. It includes judges nominated in both his first and second terms.

        

What’s at stake in this case

 

Dissenting employees filed suit against school district equity training program  

 

What happened in this case?

 

The Springfield Missouri School District began mandatory equity training programs for teachers and other  employees dealing with racism and other issues. Two employees filed suit, claiming that requiring their participation in the program violated First Amendment and other constitutional rights. A district court dismissed the case for lack of standing, and a three-judgecourt of appeals panel largely agreed.

 

The full Eighth Circuit agreed to hear the case. As a result of deciding votes by Trump judges, the previous decisions were vacated and the case was sent back to the district court to pursue the claims against Springfield. The decision was in Henderson v  Springfield R-12 School Distrtct  in December 2025.

 

  

How did the Trump judges and others in the majority rule?

 

Six judges were in the majority, led by four Trump judges, including Erickson (the author), Stras, Kobes and Grasz, plus George W Bush nominees Benton and Gruender. They agreed that there was enough evidence in the record to show First Amendment injury through imposition of a “chilling effect” on speech that should be pursued in the court below. 

 

 

What did the dissenting judges say? 

 

Five judges dissented, including George W bush judges Collotton, Smith, and Shepherd, Geoge HW Bush nominee Loken, and Obama nominee Kelly. They maintained that the record simply did not “objectively” show that the objecting employees suffered a “chilling effect” on their speech or “compelled speech.” They warned that the majority ruling could very well open the “floodgates” to lawsuits by any public employee who “disagrees with the training,” even if they do not object at the time.

 

 

Why is the result harmful?

 

The Trump judges’ deciding vote clearly threatens to render illegal the Springfield equity training program, or almost any training program for public employees in the Eighth Circuit, which includes Missouri, Arkansas,Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The decision also illustrates the importance of our federal courts to health, welfare and  justice and the significance of  having fair-minded judges on the federal bench.