Maryland Teacher Can Sue Principal Over Palestinian Flag Display

A Silver Spring, Md. teacher can sue two public school leaders over their decision to bar her from wearing a traditional Arab headscarf or displaying a Palestinian flag in her classroom.

Hibah Sayed can pursue claims for monetary damages against Sligo Middle School Principal Peter Crable in his individual capacity in the free speech case, and for injunctive relief against Crable and Montgomery County Public Schools Superintendent Thomas Taylor, said Judge Theodore D. Chuang of the US District Court for the District of Maryland in a split ruling Monday. Chuang ruled that Eleventh Amendment immunity doesn’t extend to her claims against Crable and Taylor in their personal capacities, but granted their motion to dismiss Sayed’s demand to sue them for monetary damages in their official capacities.

Sayed’s constitutional claim regarding her attire also survives, because the defendants haven’t offered any argument on whether “their interest in restrictions” outweighs her First Amendment expression, Chuang said.

In August 2023 Sayed pasted a Palestinian flag sticker on the inside of her classroom door, along with stickers depicting several other flags. She also had worn a keffiyeh since before she arrived at Sligo in 2020, and in December 2023 began wearing a T-shirt that bore the phrase “Gaza: The Soul of My Soul,” which commemorated a three-year-old Palestinian girl killed by Israeli forces, according to the opinion.

In October 2024, Crable had the Palestinian flag sticker removed, and told her that she’d no longer be allowed to wear a keffiyeh inside the school. He explained that the flag sticker and headscarf could be construed as antisemitic or supporting terrorism.

Sayed argued in her complaint that other teachers had used their classrooms to display “minimally disruptive messages to people they see as oppressed,” including Pride pins and t-shirts as well as Black Lives Matter signs, and that her expression was similarly protected by the First Amendment.

Chuang said he can’t at this stage find that items posted on the door constitute “curricular speech” rather than “private speech on a matter of public concern"—part of the assessment of whether a public employee’s expression is protected by the First Amendment.

“Where Defendants presently offer no argument that its interest in restrictions outweighs Sayed’s interest in First Amendment expression, the Court concludes that dismissal in relation to the classroom decorations is not presently warranted,” Chuang said.

CAIR Legal Defense Fund represents Sayed. Lerch, Early & Brewer Chtd. represents Taylor and Crable.

The case is Sayed v. Taylor, D. Md., No. 8:25-cv-01951, 6/1/26.