A policy requiring the use of somebody’s “preferred pronouns” was “not neutral” and amounted to “compelled speech”, a US court has ruled.

It’s just another sign of the tide turning against a political agenda that uses social pressure to enforce transgender ideology.

Ohio teacher Vivian Geraghty won a $450,000 payout after she was ‘forced to resign’ for refusing to use “preferred pronouns”, claiming that her First Amendment rights were violated.

Two of Ms Geraghty’s students requested to be addressed by names different from those listed in the school’s register. According to a court filing, the teacher recognized these requests as part of the students’ social transition but declined to comply due to her Christian beliefs.

Ms Geraghty continued to refer to the students by their birth-assigned names.

“The school attempted to compel Vivian to adopt and endorse its perspective on deeply fundamental issues of morality and human identity, such as the definition of male and female, by requiring her to actively participate in the social transition of her students,” said Logan Spena, legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom.

In response, the school district stated that it “remains committed to navigating complex and evolving legal landscapes in a way that prioritizes student safety and well-being.”

The settlement comes after the court found the school’s “pronoun practice was not neutral” and telling Ms Geraghty to use the preferred names amounted to “compelled speech”.

The ruling emphasises the point that enforcing the use of “preferred pronouns” and compelling the speech of others is not a neutral policy and was not part of Ms Geraghty’s “official duties”.

Australian psychiatrist Jillian Spencer has similarly refused to automatically “affirm” transgender identities by using “preferred pronouns”. For this, she has been disciplined by her employer, the Queensland Children’s Hospital.

HRLA is assisting Dr Spencer as she challenges this in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission.

As in the US case, the HRLA is arguing that compelling somebody to use ‘preferred pronouns’ is not neutral but is a violation of her freedom of expression, conscience and belief.

This win, along with the recent Cass review in the UK, provides hope that the tide is slowly turning away from transgender ideology.

Despite these positive signs internationally, Australia is still well behind on this issue. The freedom to speak truth without censorship is an essential first step in turning the debate around.