Federal Judge Issues Ruling on Drag Shows at Texas A&M University

A federal judge has temporarily blocked Texas A&M’s drag show ban, ruling that the school must allow a performance called “Draggieland” to proceed on campus later this month. The decision clashes with prior federal directives and ignites a fierce legal battle over school control and free speech.

Key Facts:

U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal blocked Texas A&M’s ban on drag performances.
The ruling comes after a lawsuit from the Queer Empowerment Council, an LGBT activist group.
The university cited an executive order from President Trump and a directive from Governor Abbott as the basis for the ban.
The judge said the ban likely violates the First Amendment and lacks evidence of Title IX violations.
The decision forces the university to allow the “Draggieland” drag show on March 27.

The Rest of The Story:

The Texas A&M University System had moved to ban drag shows on its campuses, citing concerns that such events promote gender ideology, which they argue runs afoul of federal directives.

Specifically, the board referenced a Trump-era executive order aimed at pulling funding from institutions promoting such content, along with a directive from Texas Governor Greg Abbott reinforcing compliance.

Judge Rosenthal, however, rejected this defense.

In her ruling, she said the board failed to demonstrate that drag shows amount to harassment or violate federal Title IX rules regarding gender discrimination.

She also claimed the executive order in question does not specifically refer to drag performances or deny the existence of male and female sexes.

Now, the university must allow the “Draggieland” event to take place on campus, at least temporarily, while the case continues in court.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is defending the university’s position, has strongly opposed the ruling.

🚨 #BREAKING: A federal judge is FORCING Texas A&M University to host a drag show on their campus, even after the board attempted to block it in accordance with a Trump Order

WTF?

Now federal judges are pushing degenerate gender ideology to STUDENTS on campus?

THIS HAS TO END. pic.twitter.com/XQZ1S7jQ1D

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) March 24, 2025

Commentary:

This ruling is a textbook case of judicial overreach.

A federal judge has effectively told a public university that it must host a drag show, even when it violates university policy and higher-level directives.

This isn’t about the First Amendment—it’s about a judge overriding legitimate institutional governance.

President Trump’s executive order clearly signaled that taxpayer dollars should not support gender ideology initiatives.

Texas A&M was simply complying with that policy, as any school receiving federal funding must do.

The university isn’t denying anyone’s right to perform drag—just choosing not to provide a stage for it with public funds.

The idea that a judge can overrule a governor’s directive and a federal executive order to force a drag festival onto a campus is absurd.

This is not what the Constitution guarantees.

The First Amendment doesn’t mean every student group gets access to public resources regardless of the content.

Drag shows often include explicit material and are adult-themed by nature.

Taxpayer-funded schools were never intended to double as venues for adult entertainment.

It’s one thing to allow speech—it’s another to fund and promote performances that many Americans find offensive.

This isn’t just about Texas A&M.

It’s about whether local institutions still have the freedom to decide what events are appropriate for their campuses.

If a university can’t say no to drag performances, what else will it be forced to host?

We hope Texas stands firm, and frankly, ignores this ruling while it is being appealed.

No judge should have the power to override both a university’s policy and a sitting governor’s directive on how public institutions are run.

The Bottom Line:

A federal judge has ordered Texas A&M to allow a drag show on campus, overriding a university policy that follows federal and state directives.

The ruling is legally shaky and reflects growing judicial interference in local governance.

Texas officials are right to push back—and they should continue to do so until a higher court restores common sense.