A federal judge has temporarily blocked the University of California from enforcing parts of its transgender harassment policy against members of Defending Education, finding the group is likely to succeed on a First Amendment challenge, the Los Angeles Times reported September 19, 2026.

U.S. District Judge Fred W. Slaughter of California’s Central District wrote that UC’s Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy “compels speech and is viewpoint-based,” according to the Times and New York Post accounts of the order. The preliminary injunction protects only members of Defending Education while the lawsuit continues — it does not strike down the policy system-wide.

What the injunction does

Slaughter barred UC from punishing Defending Education members for referring to someone “in a commonplace way” with names or pronouns corresponding to sex assigned at birth rather than gender identity, the Times reported. The order does not define when “commonplace” use crosses into abusive harassment UC may still regulate.

UC can still enforce its rules against abusive gender-based harassment. Slaughter cited the hypothetical of a bully calling a boy “little princess” or “baby girl” as conduct the university could potentially regulate, per the Times and Post.

Defending Education sued UC in June 2026 as the sole plaintiff. Four student members submitted declarations but are not individual plaintiffs. The group argued the policy is so broad that students fear punishment for expressing beliefs about biological sex — including in online messages — and that violations can lead to suspension, expulsion, or other discipline.

A UC Irvine student identified as “Student D” said in a declaration quoted in the group’s filing: “I am often in classes or small groups with people who identify as transgender and have to work hard to avoid pronouns or names in those situations,” the Times reported.

What UC and the group say

UC spokesperson Rachel Zaentz said the policy is “designed to protect members of the university community from discrimination and harassment, not to regulate protected speech,” and that while UC disagrees with the ruling, it “will always seek to foster a welcoming environment that protects both freedom of expression and the fundamental rights of all members of our community,” per the Times.

Defending Education President Nicole Neily called the order a block on a “coercive speech policy,” saying: “It is unconstitutional for public universities to compel student speech, and we will continue to defend this principle in California and other schools across the country as needed.”

The policy itself identifies “intentional or repeated” use of a name or pronoun inconsistent with an individual’s gender identity as conduct that may constitute harassment, covering students, faculty, staff, and certain third parties.

Public universities do not get a free pass to draft viewpoint scripts for how students talk about sex and gender — and a preliminary injunction is not a final knockout. Slaughter’s order is temporary, member-limited, and still lets UC police actual abuse. The fight now is whether “commonplace” disagreement stays protected speech or gets rebranded as harassment by administrative fiat.

Sources