A viral headline made waves this week: “Federal Court Declares College Drag Show ‘Protected Expression.’” It spread fast online, with people either cheering the news or calling it a step too far. But what really happened? And what does it mean for free speech on college campuses?
Let’s break it down.
The story comes from a court case involving a student group called Spectrum WT at West Texas A&M University. Back in March 2023, they planned to host a drag show on campus. The event was supposed to raise money for charity and promote support for LGBTQ rights. The main performer was someone named “Myss Myka,” who had done a drag show off campus a month earlier that some people described as “highly sexualized.”
But just 11 days before the event, the university canceled it. The school’s president, Walter Wendler, said drag shows were offensive and discriminated against women. He believed they didn’t belong on a public college campus.
That decision didn’t sit well with Spectrum WT. They filed a lawsuit against Wendler and other school officials, asking the court to let them hold the drag show on campus. They said it was unfair to block their event when others were allowed to speak freely.
At first, they lost. A lower court said the drag show didn’t clearly send a protected message under the First Amendment. In other words, the judge didn’t see it as speech that deserved legal protection. The court also said that even if the show was protected, the university president had a reasonable concern about the show’s possible “lewdness.”
But this week, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision. They ruled that the drag show was, in fact, protected under the First Amendment. The court said the event did have a message—support for LGBTQ rights—and that the university couldn’t block it just because they didn’t like what that message was.
The judge who wrote the majority opinion, Judge Southwick, said that public universities can’t make rules that stop people from expressing themselves just because the content is controversial. The First Amendment, which protects free speech, is meant to cover exactly this kind of situation—where someone wants to share a message, but others don’t like it.
The ruling doesn’t mean the case is over. It just sends it back to a lower court with new instructions. But it does stop the university from banning drag shows for now, while the case continues.
Not everyone on the court agreed. Judge James Ho, who wrote a dissenting opinion, said the decision gave more protection to drag shows than it does to religious speech. He said this kind of ruling could “turn the First Amendment upside down.” It’s a strong warning that the court may be heading in a direction that some believe favors certain political messages over others.
The group that helped Spectrum WT with the case, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (or FIRE), celebrated the ruling. “This is a victory not just for Spectrum WT,” said FIRE attorney JT Morris, “but for any public university students at risk of being silenced by campus censors.”
So, what does all this mean?
For now, it means that public universities—especially in Texas and other states under the Fifth Circuit’s control—can’t just shut down student events because they disagree with the message. Whether it’s a drag show, a political rally, or a religious meeting, the First Amendment protects speech—even if it’s uncomfortable or unpopular.
That said, this case could still change. It’s going back to a lower court, and it might even end up at the Supreme Court one day. But for now, the appeals court has made one thing clear: free speech doesn’t stop at the campus gate.
And that’s a win for the First Amendment, whether you agree with drag shows or not.