
A federal judge who routinely sides with conservative activists has upheld West Texas A&M University’s ban on campus drag performances, ignoring long-standing precedent and rejecting First Amendment arguments for why the prohibition should be overturned.
West Texas A&M University imposed the ban in 2023, when University President Walter Wendler barred Spectrum WT, the college’s LGBTQ student organization, from hosting a campus drag show to raise money for The Trevor Project, the nation’s leading LGBTQ suicide prevention organization.
Wendler blocked the show on the grounds that drag is “misogynistic” and mocks women, comparing the art form to blackface. He also maintained there is no such thing as a “harmless drag show,” arguing that performers adopt exaggerated gender expressions through makeup, clothing, and prosthetics that stereotype and insult women.
“Supporting The Trevor Project is a good idea,” he wrote in a campus-wide email. “My recommendation is to skip the show and send the dough.”
With the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Spectrum WT filed a federal lawsuit. The group argued the ban violated their First Amendment rights and sought an injunction to allow the performance to proceed.
In September 2023, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the Northern District of Texas rejected the preliminary injunction, allowing the ban to take effect. That decision was later reversed by a divided three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which determined the ban infringed on students’ free speech rights and temporarily blocked it.
The panel’s decision was vacated in October when the full Fifth Circuit — which is ideologically conservative — granted a request for an en banc rehearing. This cleared the way for Kacsmaryk to proceed with a bench trial on the merits of the case, including the request for a permanent injunction and nominal damages.
In a 46-page ruling, Kacsmaryk rejected Spectrum WT’s request for a permanent injunction, allowing the ban to stand. He compared drag to “blackface,” writing that both “mock vulnerable groups by caricaturing aspects of their identity.”
“The only difference,” he wrote, “is that one performance is ‘abhorred by cultural elites’ while the other is in vogue — at least for now.”
Kacsmaryk also argued that because drag has “no message,” it is not protected speech under the First Amendment. He added that even if Spectrum WT “intends to convey a message of bending gender norms, this Court cannot find that there is a great likelihood ‘that the message would be understood by those who viewed it.'”
Writing on her Erin in the Morning Substack, transgender journalist Erin Reed called Kacsmaryk’s ruling “particularly egregious” for likening drag to blackface.
“Blackface was created by white performers to dehumanize a marginalized group and reinforce racial subjugation,” Reed wrote. “Drag, by contrast, emerged from marginalized communities themselves as a form of self-expression, community building, and survival. It has existed across cultures and centuries, from Shakespearean theater to Harlem ballroom culture to contemporary performance.
“In its modern form, drag conveys meaning about gender identity and expression, deliberately subverting gendered expectations around clothing and performance — placing it squarely within the realm of activity protected by the First Amendment.”
Reed also noted this is not the first time Kacsmaryk — a former deputy general counsel at First Liberty Institute — has issued a controversial ruling targeting LGBTQ people. His recent record includes several decisions blocking Biden administration nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ individuals in healthcare, education, and the workplace.
Kacsmaryk’s ruling on the drag ban conflicts with recent decisions elsewhere. In May, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found a Florida law seeking to ban drag in proximity to minors was “overbroad,” “impermissibly vague,” and likely unconstitutional. Similarly, a federal judge in 2023 blocked Montana from enforcing its drag ban, concluding the law restricted speech based on content or identity without proving drag rises to the level of obscenity.
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.