A New Hampshire school district has agreed to a federal judgment finding that it violated the First Amendment rights of four people after barring two fathers from school property for wearing pink “XX” wristbands. The wristbands opposed transgender participation in girls’ sports.
Approved Thursday by U.S. District Judge Steven McAuliffe, the judgment resolves more than two years of litigation. The district’s risk pool, Primex, will pay $275,000 in legal fees and costs.
The judgment affirms the plaintiffs’ right to wear the wristbands silently at Bow School District sporting events, including along the sidelines, in spectator areas and in parking lots. It specifically says the district violated their constitutional rights by prohibiting the wristbands at a girls varsity soccer game on Sept. 17, 2024.
“It took more than two years, but the court has recognized that what happened to us was wrong,” plaintiff Kyle Fellers said. He said the ban prevented him from attending half of his daughter’s soccer games during her senior year.
The dispute began during a game between Bow High School and Plymouth Regional High School. Plymouth’s girls team included transgender player Parker Tirrell. The “XX” on the wristbands referred to female chromosomes and conveyed opposition to biological males competing in girls’ sports.
School officials, accompanied by a police officer, approached spectators about the wristbands. The situation escalated, the referee stopped the game, and Fellers and Anthony “Andy” Foote later received no-trespass orders. Foote had also worn a wristband to his daughter’s game.
Fellers, Foote, Nicole Foote and their grandfather, Eldon Rash, filed suit with help from the Institute for Free Speech and attorney Richard J. Lehmann.
Under the agreement, Primex will pay $225,000 to the institute and $50,000 to Lehmann Major List PLLC. Each plaintiff will also receive $17.91. The institute said the amount represents 1791, the year the First Amendment was ratified.
School officials said they acted to protect students from harassment. Before the game, they had received reports of possible heckling and messages they believed indicated the protest might escalate. The fathers testified that they did not intend to harass or target the player.
The plaintiffs initially lost a bid for a preliminary injunction, which McAuliffe denied in April 2025. But on Aug. 26, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found they were likely to succeed in arguing that the district had discriminated against them based on their viewpoint and returned the case for further proceedings.
The appeals court said there was no evidence the silent protest had materially disrupted the game before officials intervened, or that any player had seen the wristbands. The plaintiffs “did not march, shout, chant, or otherwise disrupt the game,” the court wrote, adding that their conduct “fell short of harassment and disruption.”
The panel also cited administrators’ descriptions of the wristband message as exclusionary or hateful, saying those comments suggested the spectators may have been punished because officials disagreed with their views.
Thursday’s resolution is a stipulated judgment agreed to by both sides. While the settlement denies wrongdoing except where the judgment specifically establishes it, the judgment declares the wristband ban unconstitutional.
The ruling applies to the district, its Board of Education and their successors. It remains in effect even if the district changes its conduct policies or athletics handbook, and the court retains authority to enforce the judgment and settlement.
The Institute for Free Speech said the order came ahead of a Bow girls varsity soccer playoff game scheduled for Friday.
