MARSHALL — A former Marshall Middle School principal will be appealing a federal judge’s ruling in her lawsuit against Marshall Public Schools, court documents said.

On Wednesday, a notice filed in U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, said Mary Kay Thomas would be appealing the dismissal of the case. In September, U.S. District Court Judge Patrick J. Schiltz ruled that Thomas’s claims of being discriminated against for advocating for LGBTQ+ students did not fall under the scope of the Civil Rights Act. Schlitz dismissed the claims.

In a Thursday statement, Thomas said she was appealing the ruling because, “We need to take every opportunity to ensure that students and staff are provided equity, and that adults are expected and responsible to support and advocate for all students, but especially for those who are marginalized.”

MPS Superintendent Jeremy Williams said Thursday that the school district was aware of Thomas’s appeal being filed.

“We trust that the appellate court will support the district court’s conclusions and that this matter can finally be put to rest,” Williams said.

Thomas sued the school district and the school board in 2021, claiming that MPS removed her as middle school principal and put her on a performance improvement plan. The school district’s actions came after Thomas refused to take down a rainbow LGBTQ+ pride flag from a display in the middle school cafeteria, and showed support for a student gay-straight alliance, the complaint alleged.

In the complaint, Thomas also claimed she was the victim of sexual harassment by school board member and former principal Bill Swope.

In his ruling, Schlitz said Thomas’s claims of discrimination did not fall under the scope of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Title VII protects employees from discrimination on the basis of factors like race, religion, sex or national origin. Similarly, he ruled that Thomas’s claims did not fall under the scope of Title IX, with prohibits sex discrimination at institutions that receive federal funding. Schlitz also found that Thomas did not face retaliation for exercising her First Amendment rights.

Schlitz dismissed Thomas’s claims of discrimination and retaliation with prejudice. Her other claims were dismissed without prejudice.