Former Yosemite Ranger Sues Over Firing for Displaying Trans Flag

Lawsuit alleges termination was retaliation for unfurling pride flag on El Capitan

Mar. 11, 2026 at 11:21pm

A former Yosemite National Park ranger has filed a lawsuit claiming they were fired for displaying a large transgender pride flag on the iconic El Capitan rock formation. The case was transferred from a Washington, D.C. court to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, where Yosemite is located.

Why it matters

The case highlights ongoing tensions around LGBTQ+ rights and representation, particularly in federal agencies and public lands. It also raises questions about free speech protections for government employees and the appropriate use of public spaces for political displays.

The details

According to the lawsuit, the former ranger, Shannon Joslin, was terminated after unfurling the transgender pride flag on El Capitan, one of Yosemite's most iconic natural landmarks. The government allegedly opened a criminal investigation into the incident, though the judge noted the "alleged conduct in firing Joslin and opening a criminal investigation over the flag display 'is concerning."

  • The lawsuit was transferred from a Washington, D.C. court to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on March 11, 2026.

The players

Shannon Joslin

A former Yosemite National Park ranger who filed a lawsuit claiming they were fired for displaying a transgender pride flag on El Capitan.

Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan

The judge who ordered the case to be transferred from Washington, D.C. to California, noting it had "no meaningful connections" to the D.C. court.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The alleged conduct in firing Joslin and opening a criminal investigation over the flag display 'is concerning'.”

— Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan

What’s next

The case will now be heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, where Yosemite National Park is located.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions around LGBTQ+ rights and representation, particularly in federal agencies and on public lands. It raises important questions about free speech protections for government employees and the appropriate use of public spaces for political displays.