A New Hampshire school district has agreed to a federal court judgment that declares it violated the First Amendment rights of parents who wore pink "XX" wristbands to silently protest transgender participation in girls' sports. The resolution, approved by U.S. District Judge Steven McAuliffe, ends more than two years of litigation and requires the district’s risk pool to pay $275,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs.
The judgment protects the four plaintiffs’ right to silently wear the wristbands at any Bow School District sporting event, including in spectator areas and parking lots. It explicitly states that the district violated their constitutional rights by barring the wristbands at a girls' varsity soccer game on September 17, 2024.
"It took more than two years, but the court has recognized that what happened to us was wrong," plaintiff Kyle Fellers said in a statement, as reported by The Associated Press. Fellers added that the ban prevented him from attending half of his daughter’s soccer games during her senior year.
The case originated from a game between Bow High School and Plymouth Regional High School, which featured a transgender player. School officials, accompanied by a police officer, confronted spectators about the wristbands, which used "XX" symbols to reference female chromosomes and express opposition to biological males competing in girls' sports. The confrontation led to the referee halting play, and Fellers and another parent, Anthony "Andy" Foote, subsequently received no-trespass orders.
School officials had argued their actions were an effort to protect students from harassment. They claimed to have received reports of potential heckling and communications suggesting the protest could escalate. However, the fathers testified that they did not intend to harass or target any player.
Initially, the parents faced a setback when McAuliffe denied their request for a preliminary injunction in April 2025. But the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later concluded that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claim of viewpoint discrimination. The appeals court sent the case back for further proceedings, finding no evidence that the silent protest caused a material disruption before school officials intervened, nor that any player actually saw the wristbands.
The appeals court noted that the plaintiffs "did not march, shout, chant, or otherwise disrupt the game," and concluded their conduct "fell short of harassment and disruption." The panel also pointed to administrators' descriptions of the message as exclusionary or hateful as evidence that officials likely punished the spectators due to disagreement with their views.
The settlement includes a provision denying wrongdoing except as established in the judgment, which declares the district’s wristband ban unconstitutional. The judgment binds the district, its Board of Education, and their successors, and the court retains authority to enforce it and the settlement. An attorney for the district did not respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press.