Who's ADF — the influential Christian law group behind Middleboro free speech case?

MIDDLEBORO — The Alliance Defending Freedom is a conservative, Christian-based legal organization at the forefront of some of the most controversial legal cases of this generation. They're most well-known for helping to draft and argue the "Gestational Age Act," a Mississippi law outlawing abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the "Gestational Age Act" in 2022, they overturned their landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that federally protected a woman's right to an abortion.

Now, the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) hopes to secure another Supreme Court victory by backing John T. Nichols Middle School student Liam Morrison in his legal battle against the Middleboro School Committee. Morrison and his family originally filed a lawsuit against the school last May when school officials asked Morrison, then a seventh grader, to change out of a T-shirt that read “there are only two genders.”

Years-long legal battle continues: 'Gross violation': Middleboro student loses 'two genders' T-shirt case. Why it's not over

Last August, ADF attorneys representing Morrison filed a notice of appeal after the United States District Court of Massachusetts ruled against Morrison in favor of the Middleboro School Committee — bringing the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. If either side wishes to appeal the First Circuit court's ruling, it would be to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Enterprise spoke with one of Morrison's legal representatives, ADF attorney Logan Spena, to learn more about the organization’s involvement in life-changing legal cases, including the one in our own backyard in Middleboro.

Who is the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)?

The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) was founded in 1994 by Christian community leaders with the self-described goal of “keeping the doors open for the Gospel," according to their website. Since then, the U.S. based organization has played various roles in 74 U.S. Supreme Court victories on behalf of pastors, churches, other religious organizations, businesses, pro-life pregnancy centers and more.

What kinds of cases does ADF take on?

"When it comes to the legal cases that we'll take, we don't require in any sense that our clients share our religious views. What we're concerned about is the Constitutional rights that everybody has," said ADF attorney Logan Spena.

While Spena says clients aren't required to share their religious views, many of the cases featured on ADF's website closely align with their conservative viewpoints.

"They are definitely rooted in traditional Christian values, but they've tried to frame their arguments using other forms of more popularly supported ideas, like religious liberty and freedom of speech," said Bridgewater State University political science Prof. Brian Frederick. "They are really emphasizing this idea of religious liberty to frame support for a lot of these conservative causes. I think that is one aspect that distinguishes their approach to litigation."

"They find these specific cases where they can use some of these more popular ideas around free speech and religious liberty, while at the same time defending their ultimate goal, which is advancing traditional views of Christianity being protected in American law and in American society in general," said Frederick.

Families plead with Brockton schools Families speak out about plan to close virtual school — only school some have known

Using local cases as precedent to influence larger, conservative issues

"ADF has been adept at identifying some of these cases that might not necessarily seem all that monumental on a nationwide basis but can be used to crystallize some of these larger issues that they want to litigate and use as precedent to deliver more significant legal ramifications in the larger political system," said Frederick.

For example, in Morrison's case, ADF has argued that he has a right to wear a T-shirt that says "There are only two genders" to school under the First Amendment right of freedom of speech.

"All students have the constitutional right to express their free speech without having to fear being punished by school officials," ADF wrote on their website.

What other cases has ADF been involved in?

Other cases litigated by ADF:

• ADF had a hand in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling by drafting and defending the 2018 Gestational Age Act before the court, which bans abortions after 15 weeks. “ADF was honored to serve on the Mississippi team defending the law at the Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,” they wrote on their website. In 2022, the Supreme Court upheld Mississippi's Gestational Age Act, overturning Roe v. Wade.

• In a more recent case, LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine, ADF successfully backed three couples who sued an IVF clinic in Alabama after their un-implanted embryos were accidently destroyed, citing the state's Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applied to their unborn children. "Cases like this one demonstrate that being pro-life entails more than just protecting unborn children from abortion. If we truly believe that life begins at conception, then this should influence how we think about assisted reproductive technologies like IVF," they wrote on their website.

• In 2021, ADF attorneys represented a pair of Wisconsin parents of transgender children who filed a lawsuit against the Kettle Moraine School District to challenge its policy that allows students to change their name and gender pronouns at school without parental consent. ADF argued that the school district violated their parental rights to choose how they want their child to be addressed, no matter how the child wished to be identified.

• In 2020, ADF attorneys represented a Virginia photographer Bob Updegrove, winning a lawsuit against Virginia officials after Updegrove refused to photograph same-sex weddings, citingh "religious reasons." He was able to continue to communicate his “business policy regarding his religious beliefs on marriage,” according to ADF’s website.

Gender and Religion: T-shirt message 'not the Christian view'

ADF is self-described as a Christian-based organization and is vocal about its stance on gender and sexuality.

“We believe in accordance with Christian teaching, that our identity as male or female is a function of the created order that God has made,” said Spena. “It's simply true that it's our sex that determines whether we are male or female," he continued, echoing a similar sentiment to what Morrison expressed on his "there are only two genders" T-shirt.

But to Andy Polluck, president of the Board of the South Coast LGBTQ Network, ADF's encouragement of Liam Morrison's message using Christianity doesn't hold up.

“I'm puzzled as someone who grew up in an evangelical background as to why Liam would choose to say that because that's not the Christian view,” Polluck said. “Had he chosen to help this population, reach out to them, understand, serve them, you know, walk a mile with them, do all the things that Jesus tells us to do, then perhaps we would be in a different position."

'Bring one of your yachts to town' Brockton rally to save Good Sam slams Steward exec

Free speech in public schools: Is there a limit?

“The issue of gender is one of enormous importance to our society right now. What it means to be male or female and what makes someone a boy or a girl is a question that, to borrow from the Supreme Court's words from a case from 1943, these are things that go to 'the heart of the existing order',” said Spena. “Those are exactly the sorts of things that students have a right to take a position on, even in the school context.”

“Schools themselves are taking positions on these issues and promoting a very specific view,” said Spena, citing pride flags hanging in Middleboro’s classrooms and hallways. “Liam has a different view. And he wants to be able to express that in a non-disruptive way. It's essential that students retain that Constitutional right, as our society is grappling with these very difficult issues.”

“The school has admitted that it engaged in viewpoint discrimination,” said Spena. “In the letter that the [Middleboro School District] sent back to Liam and to his attorneys at MFI, the school openly said they’re just not going to permit any expression that does not validate a particular gender expression or identity. But if you express a view that gender is inextricably related to sex, which means there's only two of them like Liam did, that's not allowed,” he said.

“We think that the First Circuit Court of Appeals will likely be concerned with what the school did here. And so, we do think from a precedential perspective, it's important to show that schools can't just pick one viewpoint on a subject and shut that down, especially when they're engaged in talking about that subject themselves through pride flags, and posters and things like that,” he said.

However, Middleboro school officials and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups argue that Morrison’s message is harmful to LGBTQ+ students and that there’s is a limit to what can be said in a public forum.

“Gay and non-binary kids in Massachusetts have a very high rate of bullying, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts and suicide success, not to mention violence, discrimination and other issues they face daily,” said Polluck.

“Trans kids and non-binary kids seem to be on the front line of the religious right’s cultural agenda," Polluck said.

“I think it's very damaging for these kids. It’s choosing a population that are having the most difficulty and making it worse, which is again, the complete opposite of the gospel of Jesus."

The effects of anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment on MA youth

According to a 2024 report published by the Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ+ Youth, 46% of Massachusetts LGBTQ+ students had experienced verbal harassment due to their gender, with 14% having experienced physical harassment and 7% having experienced physical assault; 68% of Massachusetts students regularly heard homophobic remarks, and 64% regularly heard negative remarks about transgender people.

“Across the nation, our LGBTQ youth are seeking light, love, and liberation from their families, schools, healthcare providers, legislators and communities, all while trying to thrive in a dangerous political environment that is attempting to erase them from history,” the Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ wrote. “As of April 24, 2023, the 469 anti-LGBTQ bills introduced target our youths’ rights to visibility, access to life-saving gender-affirming care, access to school sports, and LGBTQ books and literature.”

Where does the case stand today?

Last August, Morrison and ADF attorneys filed a notice of appeal after the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled against Morrison in a preliminary injunction. On Sept. 25, ADF attorneys filed their opening brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, urging the court to rule that Nichols Middle School violated Morrison’s First Amendment rights when it stopped him from wearing his shirts to school.

On Nov. 22, a brief filed by attorneys representing the Middleboro School Committee argued that prohibiting Morrison from wearing the shirt while at school did not violate any First Amendment rights because it was undertaken to protect the invasion of rights of other students to a safe and secure educational environment.

When will the appeal be heard?

The First Circuit court of appeals will next need to schedule a trial date, according to Spena.

“It’s fully in the hands of the Court of Appeals now,” said Spena, who says the argument will probably be scheduled for early next year.

“I hope that the court rules that this school’s discrimination against Liam's expression was unconstitutional. I hope it rules that speech can't be silenced by schools, just because of their disagreement with the viewpoint,” he said.

One step away from U.S. Supreme Court

If either side wishes to appeal the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals it would be to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court does not have to accept a case. They have to vote to take a case — and it requires four of the nine justices to take it.

This article originally appeared on The Enterprise: What to know about Alliance Defending Freedom, Middleboro school case