A suburban school district has asked a federal judge to toss a Florida man’s lawsuit, accusing school officials of illegally conspiring with his ex-wife to help their child transition from male to female, as the school district says the father’s constitutional parental rights fall short compared to the district’s alleged legal obligations to support the child's chosen gender expression and protect the child's privacy.
On June 27, Villa Park Illinois School District 45 filed a motion in Chicago federal court to dismiss the lawsuit filed by plaintiff Bryan Vesely.
“… Plaintiff’s parental interest does not outweigh (the child’s) own privacy interests under federal and state law in connection with (the child’s) expressed desire to self-identify as a female at school,” District 45 wrote in its motion.
Nikoleta Lamprinakos
| Robbins Schwarz
He is represented by attorneys Dean J. Tatooles and Mason S. Coles, of the firm of Cole Sadkin, of Chicago.
According to the complaint, Vesely shares custody a 12-year-old child, identified in the complaint as A.V.
The complaint identifies A.V. as Vesely’s son, and a sixth grade student at Jackson Middle School in Villa Park.
According to the complaint, A.V. has “expressed to his parents and School District 45’s staff that he wanted to adopt a new female name and use female pronouns at school,” as well as “dress as a female and wear make-up, including nail polish and lipstick.”
According to the complaint, Vesely said he “decided that immediately transitioning would not be in his minor son’s best interest,” and asked “A.V. to take time to explore the cause of his feelings before allowing such a significant change to his identity.”
However, the complaint asserts the child’s mother and staff at District 45 ignored Vesely’s objections, and “worked in concert … to promote or otherwise affirm A.V.’s social transition to a different gender identity at school without Bryan’s parental consent and over Bryan’s express written objection to School District 45.”
According to the complaint, the child is now being known at school by “female names” and dressing as a female, with make-up.
The complaint asserts the school district’s actions violate his fundamental rights as a parent “to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control,” granted under both the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and Article 1 of the Illinois state constitution.
Vesely is seeking a court order forbidding District 45 staff from referring to students “using a name or pronouns at odds with their biological sex, while at school, without parental consent.”
Vesely is further seeking a court order requiring District 45 and his ex-wife to pay him money damages of at least $75,000, plus unspecified punitive damages, for allegedly engaging in conspiracy to violate his constitutional parental rights.
According to court records, his ex-wife, who is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit, has not yet responded to the complaint, as she has allegedly thus far avoided process service. In a recent filing, U.S. District Judge Edmond Chang warned her to accept service, but told Vesely’s lawyers to continue their efforts to serve her with notice of the suit.
Further, in that filing, Judge Chang terminated, for now, proceedings on the school district’s motion to dismiss, saying he would prefer to allow the ex-wife the opportunity to work with the school district on responses to Vesely’s claims.
However, the motion to dismiss remained public on the court’s online docket.
In that motion, School District 45 argued Vesely has no real constitutional claim.
They asserted Vesely’s constitutional rights as a parent in this case appear to conflict with those of the child’s mother.
They further asserted Vesely’s right to control his child’s upbringing does not also require the school district to “violate” A.V.’s constitutional privacy rights to “express” their own gender at school.
Further, the school district asserted state and federal law require school officials to conceal that information from a parent, if the officials deem it to be in the child’s interest or to protect the child in some way.
“… Here to openly enforce Plaintiff’s requested prohibitions on A.V.’s self-expression would necessarily require Defendant District to both discriminate against A.V. and risk disclosure of private gender records by airing Plaintiff’s gender ‘correction’ as an element of a policy for social treatment applied to A.V.,” the school district said.
The district said a court order forcing school officials to use pronouns to address A.V. that “align with biological sex” would place the child’s physical and mental health in jeopardy.
The district further assailed Vesely’s conspiracy claims, asserting they “merely … allowed A.V. to engage in preferred social behavior and used A.V.’s preferred pronouns,” and did not engage in “a scheme designed to attack (Vesely’s) parental rights.”
“By the Plaintiff’s admission, it is by A.V.’s own request that A.V. be referred to, tolerated, and affirmed as a female at school,” the district wrote. “This Court should find that the alleged District policy to respect A.V.’s request is properly aligned with the state legislature’s legitimate intent to support transgender youth in their decisions regarding gender identity.”
District 45 is represented by attorney Nikoleta Lamprinakos, of the firm of Robbins Schwarz Nicholas Lifton & Taylor, of Chicago.