Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A federal appeals court has reopened a closely watched lawsuit by a former Brownsburg High School teacher who claims he was forced out for refusing to address transgender students by their chosen names, setting up a potential trial over the balance between religious freedom and school nondiscrimination policies.
In a ruling issued Tuesday, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed part of a lower court’s decision granting summary judgment to the Brownsburg Community School Corporation and sent the case back to U.S. District Court in Indianapolis for further proceedings.
The divided three-judge appellate panel found that factual disputes remain over whether allowing teacher John Kluge to address students by their last names only—a practice he adopted to avoid using names he said conflicted with his Christian beliefs—would have posed an “undue hardship” on the school’s operations.
The decision is rooted in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Groff v. DeJoy, which raised the bar for employers seeking to deny religious accommodations.
Under Groff, employers must now show a “substantial” burden on their business to reject a requested accommodation, rather than the previous “more than de minimis” standard. Applying that more demanding test, the 7th Circuit concluded that a jury must determine whether the school’s hardships were significant enough to justify denying Kluge’s request.
The Terre Haute-based Bopp Law Firm filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Young America’s Foundation in support of Kluge in August 2024.
James Bopp Jr., lead counsel on YAF’s brief, told The Lawyer he thought the 7th Circuit’s decision represented a very positive development because it takes seriously the protection of religious liberty for employees employed by a government entity.
Bopp said the appeals court specifically rejected the idea that substantial harm can be proven just by subjective emotional distress.
“It has to be substantial harm that can be objectively demonstrated,” Bopp said, adding that the court emphasized student safety has to do with threats of physical harm, not emotional distress.
Vicki Nieman Murphy, the Brownsburg school district’s director of communications, said the district never comments on pending litigation.
Appellate Judge Ilana Rovner wrote in a dissenting opinion that given the lack of a dispute as to the concerns that were reported to school and district officials, Brownsburg reasonably concluded that the accommodation was a failure and that allowing it to continue presented the risk of legal liability.
“In remanding the case for a trial at which the jury will be invited to reassess de novo the evidence that confronted Brownsburg and to decide for itself how credible the concerns reported to Brownsburg were, the court is setting a perilous precedent for employers,” Rovner wrote.
Kluge taught orchestra at Brownsburg from 2014 to 2018. In 2017, the school adopted a policy requiring teachers to use the names listed in the student information system, which could be updated for transgender students with parental and medical approval.
Kluge objected to this policy on religious grounds, saying that using names inconsistent with a student’s sex assigned at birth would affirm a transgender identity, which he said he believes is sinful.
The school did not formally approve Kluge’s request to use last names only, but his supervisors initially allowed him to do so. Over the course of the 2017–2018 school year, however, some students, parents, and teachers complained that his practice was hurtful and made transgender students feel singled out or disrespected.
One student said he felt “dehumanized,” while another said the classroom became an uncomfortable environment. School administrators later told Kluge he would be expected to follow the name policy the next school year or face termination. He submitted a resignation, which the school board accepted.
Kluge sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, alleging the district failed to accommodate his religious beliefs. A federal district court sided with the school, ruling that accommodating Kluge would have caused undue hardship by undermining the school’s goal of providing a safe and inclusive environment for all students and potentially exposing it to liability under Title IX.
The 7th Circuit disagreed. Writing for the panel, Judge Michael Brennan said a jury should decide whether the school’s concerns were substantial enough to meet the new Groff standard, especially given conflicting evidence in the record. Some students and teachers supported Kluge’s approach and said they did not perceive any problems in his classroom.
Brennan’s written opinion says whether Kluge’s use of only last names caused harm is unclear at this point in the litigation.
“The only fact the parties agree on is that Kluge called students by their last names,” Brennan wrote. “There is conflicting evidence whether that act in isolation caused the alleged emotional distress.”
The panel also rejected the school’s argument that allowing Kluge’s practice would have placed it on the “razor’s edge” of Title IX liability, calling that risk speculative based on the record.
However, the court upheld the dismissal of Kluge’s separate claim that the school retaliated against him for his religious beliefs, finding he had not presented evidence to rebut the school’s stated reasons for ending his employment.
The ruling sends the case back to the U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana for further consideration.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.