First Amendment Rights: Melissa McCoul Sues Texas A&M

DaisyDay · Feb 5, 2026

Melissa McCoul had taught a course on children's literature including a segment addressing gender identity. A student objected to the segment and was told she could leave the class. The student complained and Prof. McCoul was fired. This thread is not about transgenderism, but about the teacher's First Amendment rights.

https://thehill.com/homenews/education/5724310-professor-fired-first-amendment/

Professor Melissa McCoul was terminated because of the content of her course; content that was consistent with her syllabus, the course description, and the approved purpose of the course. Texas A&M University ran roughshod over Dr. McCoul’s due process rights in its haste to meet Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s demand that the University fire her,” the lawsuit reads.

...Despite two independent bodies determining the university violated McCoul’s rights and unjustly fired her, the institution has not reinstated her job, the lawsuit said.

After McCoul was fired, university president Mark Welsh resigned from his position after backlash.

The lawsuit comes days after Texas A&M announced it was ending its women’s and gender studies degree program.

ThatRobGuy · Feb 5, 2026

Is Texas a state where First Amendment rights extend to private employment?

Here in Ohio (which I would guess has similar laws as Texas in that regard, both being red states), it's generally considered "at-will" employment.

Where either the employee or the employer and terminate the relationship at any time for any reason. (barring termination on the basis federally protected classes)

Per the Hill article you linked:
Melissa McCoul, a senior English department professor, was caught in a political storm when a video circulated of a student challenging her lesson regarding gender identity in children’s literature. She kicked the student out of class ...

If we were to apply that to another employment scenario...
Let's say the executive team at my company said "We're not going to discuss XYZ in weekly strategy meetings anymore"
I start talking about XYZ, one of my staff calls me out for it, and I discipline them for calling me out.
Executive team makes the decision to fire me

I don't think a lawsuit based on 1A would have much weight. They same way if I opted to protest some cause in the middle of the work day on company property, or wear some article of clothing they said we weren't allowed to, and they fired me for it, suing them based on 1A would be a stretch.

Many of the enumerated rights we have apply to protections pertaining to what the government can't punish for doing, not employers.

For instance, the government can't arrest me or throw me in jail for calling my boss an idiot in front of other staff, but my boss could certainly fire me for it.

essentialsaltes · Feb 5, 2026

Some background from previous thread.

DaisyDay · Feb 5, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
Is Texas a state where First Amendment rights extend to private employment?

Here in Ohio (which I would guess has similar laws as Texas in that regard, both being red states), it's generally considered "at-will" employment.

Where either the employee or the employer and terminate the relationship at any time for any reason. (barring termination on the basis federally protected classes)

Per the Hill article you linked:
Melissa McCoul, a senior English department professor, was caught in a political storm when a video circulated of a student challenging her lesson regarding gender identity in children’s literature. She kicked the student out of class ...

If we were to apply that to another employment scenario...
Let's say the executive team at my company said "We're not going to discuss XYZ in weekly strategy meetings anymore"
I start talking about XYZ, one of my staff calls me out for it, and I discipline them for calling me out.
Executive team makes the decision to fire me

I don't think a lawsuit based on 1A would have much weight. They same way if I opted to protest some cause in the middle of the work day on company property, or wear some article of clothing they said we weren't allowed to, and they fired me for it, suing them based on 1A would be a stretch.

Many of the enumerated rights we have apply to protections pertaining to what the government can't punish for doing, not employers.

For instance, the government can't arrest me or throw me in jail for calling my boss an idiot in front of other staff, but my boss could certainly fire me for it.

Texas A&M is a public state university. The governor insisted she be fired. Hope this helps.

ThatRobGuy · Feb 5, 2026

DaisyDay said:
Texas A&M is a public state university. The governor insisted she be fired. Hope this helps.

Still doesn't change what my reply would have been with regards to the nature of employment.

Even if someone worked for the United States post office, jumping on the desk with a sign that calls the boss as a jackass could still get one fired.

What the First Amendment does protect:

Public university employees have protection for speech on matters of public concern when speaking as private citizens
They can't be fired simply for expressing political views or criticizing the government outside of work

What it doesn't protect:

Speech made as part of official job duties (the Supreme Court's Garcetti decision established the limits of protection)
Speech that disrupts university operations or undermines working relationships and leadership directives

Meaning, if a professor said "Governor Abbott is an idiot, here are my opinions on gender..." in the breakroom or off-campus, and a student overheard them, they can't be fired for that.

However, if a professor said "The earth is flat, don't believe what those guys in the physics department say" in the middle of a lecture or as part of a class assignment (if the school/state have already mandated a 'we're not going to have our university associated with any of that flat-earth nonsense'), then yes, they can be fired for that and it's not a first amendment violation.

DaisyDay · Feb 6, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
Still doesn't change what my reply would have been with regards to the nature of employment.

Really? I believe that pointing out that this is a public state university and that the highest government official in the state pressed for her firing over her teaching the course she was hired to teach directly addresses your "Is Texas a state where First Amendment rights extend to private employment?"

ThatRobGuy said:
Even if someone worked for the United States post office, jumping on the desk with a sign that calls the boss as a jackass could still get one fired.

That is not remotely analogous to the professor's firing.

ThatRobGuy said:
What the First Amendment does protect:

Public university employees have protection for speech on matters of public concern when speaking as private citizens

They can't be fired simply for expressing political views or criticizing the government outside of work

What it doesn't protect:

Speech made as part of official job duties (the Supreme Court's Garcetti decision established the limits of protection)

Speech that disrupts university operations or undermines working relationships and leadership directives

Attribution? I don't understand this one:

Speech made as part of official job duties (the Supreme Court's Garcetti decision established the limits of protection)

Can you explain?

ThatRobGuy said:
Meaning, if a professor said "Governor Abbott is an idiot, here are my opinions on gender..." in the breakroom or off-campus, and a student overheard them, they can't be fired for that.

However, if a professor said "The earth is flat, don't believe what those guys in the physics department say" in the middle of a lecture or as part of a class assignment (if the school/state have already mandated a 'we're not going to have our university associated with any of that flat-earth nonsense'), then yes, they can be fired for that and it's not a first amendment violation.

Neither of your examples have anything to do with this situation.

ThatRobGuy · Feb 6, 2026

DaisyDay said:
Attribution? I don't understand this one:

Speech made as part of official job duties (the Supreme Court's Garcetti decision established the limits of protection)

Can you explain?

Garcetti v. Ceballos - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision involving First Amendment free speech protections for government employees. The plaintiff in the case was a district attorney who claimed that he had been passed up for a promotion for criticizing the legitimacy of a warrant. The Court ruled, in a 5–4 decision, that because his statements were made pursuant to his position as a public employee, rather than as a private citizen, his speech had no First Amendment protection.

Meaning, if the Teacher is a government employee by way being a employed by a public university, speech they make while acting in that capacity (vs. speech they make while acting as a private citizen) is not protected by 1A.

DaisyDay said:
Neither of your examples have anything to do with this situation.

Sure it does, if directives came from the top down suggesting "we're not going to talking about XYZ anymore", and someone still does it while in the capacity of their job, then they run the risk of getting canned.

Pommer · Feb 6, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
Meaning, if the Teacher is a government employee by way being a employed by a public university, speech they make while acting in that capacity (vs. speech they make while acting as a private citizen) is not protected by 1A.

Oh, I’m fairly certain that even tenure could be threatened if professors bring social rancor down upon their fair school, (or other), and teachers will then usually moderate their rhetoric unless they witness something awful, so awful that they’re willing to risk losing their jobs over this, (or that).

Universities clamping down on “controversy“ is a trope (for sakes), the only ones we in the hoi polloi hear about, are the “troublemakers in the universities”.

The thing about troublemakers, though, is, people are prone to listen to what they have to say, if their livelihood can be axed.
This is a big deal; we “keep the “‘troublemakers’” in the universities for a reason, so they don’t get in the way of politics!

Search

Search

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

First Amendment Rights: Melissa McCoul Sues Texas A&M

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

More options

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd

More options

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform

More options

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

More options

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd

More options

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

More options

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd

Garcetti v. Ceballos - Wikipedia

More options

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

More options

Need help?

Similar threads