News and Events => Political and Legal News => Topic started by: Jessica_Rose on January 20, 2026, 09:10:54 AM Return to Full Version
Title: Federal judge upholds drag ban claiming drag is the same as “blackface”
Post by: Jessica_Rose on January 20, 2026, 09:10:54 AM
Post by: Jessica_Rose on January 20, 2026, 09:10:54 AM
Federal judge upholds drag ban claiming drag is the same as "blackface"
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2026/01/federal-judge-upholds-drag-ban-claiming-drag-is-the-same-as/
Molly Sprayregen (20 Jan 2026)
A right-wing federal judge compared drag to blackface in a ruling allowing a Texas university to ban drag shows on campus, arguing that drag is not a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment.
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by the president during his first term, emphatically agreed with West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler's ban of the art form, endorsing Wendler's characterization of drag as something that "denigrates women in the same way that blackface denigrates African Americans."
In his ruling, Kacsmaryk agreed that blackface and drag equivalently "mock vulnerable groups by caricaturing aspects of their identity."
"The only difference is that one performance is 'abhorred by cultural elites' while the other is in vogue–at least for now," Kacsmaryk wrote.
Kacsmaryk ruled that, since drag itself has "no message," it's not a form of speech that is protected by the First Amendment, writing that even if a student gruop "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.'"
Kacsmaryk's is the final ruling after the case has moved through the courts over the past several years.
Trans journalist Erin Reed called the ruling "particularly egregious" due to the judge's reasoning that it's equally offensive to blackface.
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2026/01/federal-judge-upholds-drag-ban-claiming-drag-is-the-same-as/
Molly Sprayregen (20 Jan 2026)
A right-wing federal judge compared drag to blackface in a ruling allowing a Texas university to ban drag shows on campus, arguing that drag is not a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment.
Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by the president during his first term, emphatically agreed with West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler's ban of the art form, endorsing Wendler's characterization of drag as something that "denigrates women in the same way that blackface denigrates African Americans."
In his ruling, Kacsmaryk agreed that blackface and drag equivalently "mock vulnerable groups by caricaturing aspects of their identity."
"The only difference is that one performance is 'abhorred by cultural elites' while the other is in vogue–at least for now," Kacsmaryk wrote.
Kacsmaryk ruled that, since drag itself has "no message," it's not a form of speech that is protected by the First Amendment, writing that even if a student gruop "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.'"
Kacsmaryk's is the final ruling after the case has moved through the courts over the past several years.
Trans journalist Erin Reed called the ruling "particularly egregious" due to the judge's reasoning that it's equally offensive to blackface.
Title: Re: Federal judge upholds drag ban claiming drag is the same as “blackface”
Post by: Simplycause on January 20, 2026, 11:35:04 AM
Post by: Simplycause on January 20, 2026, 11:35:04 AM
Everyone should look at this and be afraid. Not just people who perform drag or dress in drag.
Personally I think banning it under first amendment grounds sets a dangerous precedent for everyone. You could simply say that first amendment protections don't extend to activities that need to be approved by the university.
And then to further qualify it and say even if it's in the form of "protest" it wouldn't be allowed because people won't understand it is even worse.
It doesn't need to be understood to be a protest. There doesn't even have to be a message.
By the way Blackface IS protected by the first amendment.
Personally I think banning it under first amendment grounds sets a dangerous precedent for everyone. You could simply say that first amendment protections don't extend to activities that need to be approved by the university.
And then to further qualify it and say even if it's in the form of "protest" it wouldn't be allowed because people won't understand it is even worse.
It doesn't need to be understood to be a protest. There doesn't even have to be a message.
By the way Blackface IS protected by the first amendment.