We reported back in March about Bryan Craig, a girls’ basketball coach and guidance counselor at Rich Central High School in Chicago’s south suburbs, who was fired because he had written and published a relationship book entitled It’s Her Fault. In the book, he suggested that, in his experience, women have trouble maintaining relationships because they act based on emotions rather than emotions plus intellect. Now, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has upheld his firing and added a new twist.
The Seventh Circuit ruled that the school district, Rich Township High School District 227, “reasonably expected that some students would be apprehensive about” asking Mr Craig for help, “given his views on women. For example, Craig asserts that women do not succeed in relationships because of their tendency to ‘act based on emotion alone instead of emotion plus intellect'”:
Is it unreasonable to think a female Rich Central student who learned that Craig believed women are not inclined to rational thought may decide against visiting his office for career or other advice? We think not. Nor would it be unreasonable to believe a high school girl would keep her relationship problems to herself knowing that Craig stressed in his book the importance of a woman’s sexual “submissiveness” to her male partner.
These portions of It’s Her Fault addressed subjects inextricably related to issues for which a female high school student may seek the advice of her guidance counselor. [The school district] reasonably concluded that some of these students, knowing Craig’s views on these topics, would decline to ask for his help.
Most off-campus speech, such as the publication of Mr Craig’s book, is protected under the free speech clause of the First Amendment. However, when the speech interferes with a public servant’s job, the rules change. See our earlier report for more information about why that happens.
In this particular case, District 227 officials argued that the book would become widely known at Rich Central and would “create an intimidating educational environment” at the school, the Seventh Circuit found. The panel of judges felt the “hypersexualized content of the book loomed large” in their analysis.
Because Mr Craig had an inordinate amount of trust and authority in working directly with students, including female students, at a public school, his job required him to “maintain a safe space for his students in order to ensure they remain willing to come to him for advice. If (Mr) Craig fails to create the appropriate environment for his students, they will not approach him and he cannot do his job,” the court concluded.
The school district was therefore justified in firing him, and doing so did not violate his First-Amendment right to free speech. The case is unlikely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, since the Seventh Circuit agreed with the district court’s conclusion, even though it based its ruling on a different rationale.