Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals allows Dr. Allan Josephson to take his First Amendment retaliation case to trial after being fired for expressing views on gender dysphoria treatment
In an important win for free speech in higher education, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has ruled in favor of Dr. Allan Josephson, a former University of Louisville professor who was demoted, harassed, and ultimately fired after expressing his views on gender dysphoria. The ruling allows Dr. Josephson’s case, Josephson v. Ganzel, to proceed to trial in District Court.
Read More
Dr. Josephson, who had a distinguished 40-year career at the university and was instrumental in rebuilding its child psychiatry program, came under fire after speaking at a 2017 panel hosted by the Heritage Foundation. During the discussion, he voiced concerns about the treatment of children experiencing gender dysphoria, emphasizing the importance of addressing underlying psychological factors before resorting to medical interventions. He stated that gender dysphoria “cannot be fully addressed with drugs and surgery,” and highlighted that gender confusion often resolves by the end of adolescence.
Retaliation & Demotion
Shortly after his participation in the panel, university officials retaliated by demoting Dr. Josephson to a junior faculty member, stripping him of teaching duties, and subjecting him to other forms of harassment. In February 2019, the university announced it would not renew his contract, effectively ending his academic career.
Dr. Josephson, represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys, filed a lawsuit against the university, arguing that his First Amendment rights were violated. In March 2023, a federal district court ruled that a jury should hear his claims. On Tuesday, the Sixth Circuit upheld that decision, affirming that Dr. Josephson’s speech was constitutionally protected and that university officials must stand trial for their actions.
“Public universities have no business punishing professors simply because they hold different views than a few colleagues or administrators,” said ADF Senior Counsel Travis Barham, who argued the case before the court. “The court’s decision affirms that basic truth. Dr. Josephson had a long and distinguished career… and the university punished him for expressing his opinion. That’s exactly what the First Amendment prohibits.”
Personal Capacity Participation
The Sixth Circuit, in its ruling, reinforced that Dr. Josephson’s participation in the Heritage Foundation panel was in his personal capacity and did not justify the retaliation he faced. “Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Josephson, as we must, Josephson has shown that he engaged in protected speech,” the court wrote in its opinion. The judges added that the university officials “should have known that Josephson’s speech was protected and that retaliating against Josephson… would violate his First Amendment rights.”
Barham emphasized the broader implications of the ruling: “We look forward to continuing to protect Dr. Josephson’s clearly established right to free speech and reminding all public universities that they are marketplaces of ideas.”
The case is now set to go to trial, where Dr. Josephson will have the opportunity to fully present his claims of retaliation and defend his right to free speech.
