A licensed clinical social worker employed by Oregon’s InterMountain Education Service District (IMESD) has filed a federal lawsuit after district officials ordered him to remove three children’s books from his office displays, citing violations of the district’s “Every Student Belongs” policy. The case, filed May 21, 2025, raises significant First Amendment questions about viewpoint discrimination in educational settings while reflecting broader national tensions over book challenges in schools.
District censorship triggers constitutional challenge
Rod Theis, who has worked with IMESD since 2008 providing educational assessments across 17 rural school districts in eastern Oregon, displayed three books in his offices: “He is He” and “She is She” by Ryan and Bethany Bomberger, illustrated children’s books that celebrate God’s gift of biological sex, and “Johnny the Walrus” by conservative commentator Matt Walsh, a satirical children’s story about a boy who thinks that he is a walrus but comes to accept that he is a boy.
After a staff complaint in October 2024 labeled the books “transphobic,” district officials ordered their removal and warned Theis that “further conduct of this nature may result in discipline up to and including termination of employment”. The district characterized the book display as “a hostile expression of animus toward another person relating to their actual or perceived gender identity.”
The lawsuit, brought by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), argues the district engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. “This case isn’t about books; it’s about public officials telling an employee that he isn’t allowed to express a view that differs from their own,” stated Tyson Langhofer, ADF Senior Counsel and Director of the ADF Center for Academic Freedom.
Theis expressed his commitment to respectful treatment while defending his rights: “I want every student I work with to experience kindness, dignity, and respect during their time with me. Government officials are wrong to tell me I can’t express my sincere religious beliefs about male and female”. The complaint highlights that while Theis faced censorship, other district employees freely display political messages and materials supporting various viewpoints without restriction.
Legal precedents frame complex educational speech rights
The case enters uncertain legal territory as courts grapple with balancing First Amendment protections, educational authority, and parental rights. The foundational Board of Education v. Pico (1982) established limited protections against book removal, with Justice William Brennan writing that “local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books”. However, the Court’s fractured decision—with seven justices writing separate opinions—left many questions unresolved about school authority over educational materials. Recent federal court rulings have diverged significantly, with the Fifth Circuit’s May 2025 en banc decision in Little v. Llano County ruling that library collection decisions constitute “government speech” not subject to First Amendment challenges, while other circuits maintain stronger protections against viewpoint-based book removals.
The Supreme Court’s pending decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, addressing parental rights to opt children out of LGBTQ+-themed instruction, may reshape this legal landscape. Conservative justices appeared sympathetic to expanding parental rights during April 2025 oral arguments, potentially affecting how courts balance competing interests in educational settings.
ADF, which has secured 15 Supreme Court victories since 2011 and played various roles in 77 total Supreme Court wins, has established itself as a prominent force in education-related litigation, with recent wins in cases expanding religious school access and establishing parental consent requirements for gender-related decisions in schools.
National book challenge trends intensify local disputes
The Oregon case reflects dramatic national shifts in book challenges since 2020. American Library Association data shows attempts to censor books surged from 377 in 2019 to 1,247 in 2023, with 72% now originating from organized pressure groups rather than individual parents. Books featuring LGBTQ+ characters or themes comprise 47% of targeted titles, while three-quarters are written by authors from marginalized communities.
Oregon experienced record challenges with 151 books contested in the 2023-2024 school year. The Theis case uniquely involves employee speech rights rather than library collection decisions, potentially establishing new precedent for how districts regulate workplace expression on contested social issues. As federal litigation proceeds without significant updates since the May filing, the case underscores how local educational disputes increasingly require constitutional resolution rather than community dialogue.
