Lorena Biassotti and Lydia Dominguez filed the suit Monday in Clark County District Court. The district declined Tuesday to comment on the litigation.

The dispute centers on a post Biassotti made on X after the Aug. 13 board meeting. It included a photo of her and Dominguez standing in front of a large district logo. Biassotti is wearing a T-shirt with an “XX-XY” design — the logo of XX-XY Athletics, a company that says it exists to protect women’s sports and spaces. The post began: “Truth is not hate. Protect women’s sports from gender confusion.” Biassotti has said the shirt reflects her religious beliefs.

At the Aug. 27 board meeting, Stevens publicly reminded Biassotti of the social media policy, which says board members must refrain from “posting opinions on social media regarding issues that may be socially or politically sensitive and may be perceived as coming from the district or the full board.” The policy also bars members from publicly criticizing the board or individual trustees regarding a decision after the full board has decided.

Stevens said she had previously spoken privately with Biassotti about the policy. “I’m not in any way telling a trustee what they can and cannot say,” Stevens said at the meeting. “This item on our agenda is meant to be a reminder that we as a board decided that we would hold ourselves to a higher standard and be trustees that focus on governance so we don’t become a board that is a distraction from all the good work that our superintendent, her team and, frankly, this board is doing to make this a destination district.”

Stevens added that trustees have the right to violate the policies, but that enforcement is part of the policy. “That’s why we’re here today,” she said.

Biassotti responded at the meeting that she had the right to express her views and said she and Dominguez planned to sue. The lawsuit echoes that argument, stating that Biassotti wore the shirt because of a sincerely held religious belief about the nature of humanity. “Members of this board may disagree,” the suit says. “They are entitled to think differently. They are not entitled to turn their religious beliefs into a government code violation and start ratcheting up a government-sponsored garrote on the neck of free speech.”

The suit characterizes the private and public reminders as disciplinary actions that chill free speech. The policy itself describes the reminders as steps in a “progressive response process” meant to remind board members of the rules, with censure only possible after a public reminder.

The lawsuit also alleges that Stevens removed Biassotti from a board assignment because of the T-shirt and social media controversy. When Biassotti pressed Stevens at the Aug. 27 meeting about what was inappropriate in her post, Stevens referred to other district policies on safe and respectful learning environments, bullying, discrimination and the rights and needs of students with diverse gender identities or expressions.

Dominguez objected to the reminder, saying it did not belong on a regular meeting agenda and that allegations were being discussed. According to the suit, Dominguez owns one of the same XX-XY shirts but refrains from wearing it out of fear of board and district reprisal.

The suit also notes that Biassotti and Dominguez campaigned openly on their conservative views and were elected “not just in spite of their views, but according to a number of constituents who spoke at the Aug. 27 meeting, they were elected because of their views.” Both are first-term board members elected in 2024. They were members of the Clark County chapter of the conservative parental rights group Moms for Liberty until they left for personal reasons during the 2024 campaign, though both expressed continued support for the group’s ideals after leaving. Biassotti helped found the local chapter.

The lawsuit asks the court to rule that the policies violate trustees’ free-speech rights under the U.S. and Nevada constitutions and to bar the district from enforcing them. It also seeks to remove references to the Aug. 27 proceeding from board records and to restore Biassotti’s board assignment. Biassotti further contends the policies were applied to her shirt and post because of her views, violating her religious freedom, and that she did not receive proper notice of the proceeding under Nevada’s Open Meeting Law. The suit seeks damages and attorney fees.