Kayla Smiley v. Katie Jenner

── Kayla Smiley v. Katie Jenner ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Date: April 21, 2026 Category: General In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-2543 KAYLA SMILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KATIE JENNER, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. No. 1:23-cv-01001-JPH-MKK — James P. Hanlon, Judge. ____________________ ARGUED FEBRUARY 23, 2024 — DECIDED APRIL 21, 2026 ____________________ Before SCUDDER, JACKSON-AKIWUMI, and PRYOR, Circuit Judges. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge. In 2023, Kayla Smiley was due to begin teaching grades 1–3 in the Indianapolis Public School system when Indiana enacted a statute prohibiting public schools and their teachers from providing “instruction” on “human sexuality” to students in prekindergarten through third grade. Ms. Smiley invoked 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and chal- lenged the measure as facially overbroad and vague in 2 No. 23-2543 violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. She asked the district court to declare the curriculum limitation uncon- stitutional and to enjoin its enforcement. Because Ms. Smiley has failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits, we affirm the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction. I A Indiana law establishes curriculum requirements for cer- tain schools within the state. See Ind. Code § 20-30-1-1 et seq., 20-30-17-1. In 2023, the state General Assembly passed Indi- ana House Enrolled Act 1608, which added a new curriculum limitation: A school, an employee or staff member of a school, or a third party vendor used by a school to provide instruction may not provide any in- struction to a student in prekindergarten through grade 3 on human sexuality. Id. § 20-30-17-2. By its terms, HEA 1608 allows teachers to “respond[] to a question from a student” on human sexuality. Id. § 20-30-17- 4. It also permits teachers to instruct on academic standards “developed by the department [of education]” on enumer- ated subjects (such as science and math) and to provide re- quired instruction on child abuse and child sexual abuse not- withstanding the restriction imposed by the curriculum limi- tation. See id. § 20-30-17-3; see also id. §§ 20-31-3-2, 20-30-5-5.7. But the General Assembly otherwise left the terms “instruc- tion” and “human sexuality” undefined. No. 23-2543 3 The Indiana Department of Education administers state li- censing standards for teachers. On the recommendation of the Secretary of Education, the Department may suspend or re- voke a teacher’s license for: “(1) immorality; (2) misconduct in office; (3) incompetency; or (4) willful neglect of duty.” Id. § 20-28-5-7. Indiana law also permits a teacher to challenge a licensing action in an administrative process. See id. §§ 20-28- 5-7, 4-21.5-3-1 et seq. Kayla Smiley filed this action in federal court in Indianap- olis in June 2023, a month before HEA 1608 was set to go into effect and shortly before she would begin teaching grades 1– 3 in the 2023–2024 school year. Ms. Smiley alleges that Sec- tion 20-30-17-2 will capture, or at least chill, protected speech that she primarily wishes to engage in while serving as an el- ementary school teacher. She points to some specific exam- ples of speech, such as the choice to include books in her class- room library that touch on topics of parenting, and gender and sexual identity, to place stickers on her water bottle and car communicating pro-LGBTQ+ messages, and to correct students when they use pejorative terms related to