Daily Archives: January 26, 2022

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. headlined a Defeat the Mandates rally in Washington DC and claimed that vaccine mandates are worse than the Holocaust. This was publicized as an anti-mandate rally, but many of the people there were openly anti-vaccine. Kennedy made the case that at least Jews and other minority groups in Nazi Germany had a chance at hiding or escaping. He said, today, the mechanisms are being put in place that will make it so none of us can run and none of us can hide.

The Auschwitz Memorial put out a statement condemning the comparison saying, exploiting of the tragedy of people who suffered, were humiliated, tortured & murdered by the totalitarian regime of Nazi Germany including children like Anne Frank in a debate about vaccines & limitations during a global pandemic is a sad symptom of moral & intellectual decay. Kennedy also touched on a few other conspiracy theories in a subtle way meant to appeal to those who are worried about 5G and low orbit satellites. While RFK Jr. has done great work in some areas including environmental law, this speech can potentially do a tremendous amount of damage.

The David Pakman Show is a news and political talk program, known for its controversial interviews with political and religious extremists, liberal and conservative politicians, and other guests.

Missed an episode? Check out David Pakman on our Youtube Channel anytime or visit the show page for the latest clips.

#FreeSpeechTV is one of the last standing national, independent news networks committed to advancing progressive social change.

#FSTV is available on Dish, DirectTV, AppleTV, Roku, Sling, and online at freespeech.org

Defeat the Mandates Anne Frank Auschwitz Memorial Conspiracy Theories global pandemic Holocaust Nazi Germany Robert F. Kennedy Jr. totalitarian Washington DC

Read more:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr Defeat the Mandates - Free Speech TV

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

Original post:
Letter: There's a right to free speech, but hatred doesn't make us better - NRToday.com

A grand jury in Georgia has been approved to investigate Donald Trumps election interference in the state. After losing the race there to Joe Biden, Trump badgered Governor Brian Kemp, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, and other election officials to change the outcome in his favor. Famously, Trump was recorded on a phone call saying, "I just want to find 11,780 votes." The former president may have broken the law with this comment and others like it.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis requested to seat the grand jury on May 2nd. The decision of whether to press charges is expected to come in the first half of 2022. For all the claims of election fraud that Trump has made ever since the 2020 election, he could be the one facing penalties for tampering with the voting process. In addition to this investigation, Trump is also facing a civil suit out of New York having to do with possible financial infractions. The problems continue to pile up for the ex-POTUS and they are certainly well deserved.

The David Pakman Show is a news and political talk program, known for its controversial interviews with political and religious extremists, liberal and conservative politicians, and other guests.

Missed an episode? Check out David Pakman on our Youtube Channel anytime or visit the show page for the latest clips.

#FreeSpeechTV is one of the last standing national, independent news networks committed to advancing progressive social change.

#FSTV is available on Dish, DirectTV, AppleTV, Roku, Sling, and online at freespeech.org

#davidpakmanshow Brad Raffensperger Brian Kemp ex-POTUS Fani Willis Fulton County District Joe Biden New York Trump

View post:
Criminal Grand Jury Approved for Trump Election Interference - Free Speech TV

About 15 people signed up to speak at Thursdays Board of Education meeting at CMS. Many parents voiced opposition to proposed policy 9325 which would reduce allotted time for speakers from 3 minutes to 2, limit public hearing to an hour and hold remaining comments to the end of the meeting.

The policy falls under Meeting Conduct in the Boards bylaws.

Since the start of the pandemic, there have been numerous speakers during public comment, and the two minute limit would allow more people to speak.

During Thursdays public hearing portion of the meeting, there were comments on policy 9325, as well as the practice of teachers bringing students outdoors for lunch in winter.

Also, there were comments that have come up previously, including complaints about use of federal funding, children being required to wear masks in school and social-emotional learning curriculum.

Jackie Homan suggested time limits was shorten because the Board didnt want to listen to certain opinions.

You dont want to hear about medical freedom from parents who have come here month after month to plead with you to change blatantly discriminatory Covid policies, and to beg you to start following the science instead of blindly adhering to the false belief and that a piece of fabric stops an airborne virus. It doesnt, said Homan, who has a medical exemption from the mask mandate.

Homan continued, You seem to have adopted another policy for Covid, one I dont recall coming to a vote. This is the policy that requires young children to eat outside in 28 weather with 30MPH winds. Who made that policy decision?

Lastly, she asked, (Are) masks, testing or vaccine strings are tied to the ESSER III (federal) money?

Carl Higbie, a North Mianus School parent, said he was unhappy that his child had eaten lunch outdoors earlier in the week.

I find out that kids, including my daughter, are outside in 30 weather, in 37MPH winds, having lunch. This is completely intolerable.There was a small craft advisory warning on the day she was eating outside, sitting on the ground. Its January in Connecticut, not Miami.

Not voted on here. Just arbitrary policy, he added. There is no mechanism for dialogue in these meetings. Im asking who is at fault and who is going to be punished for it? How about we move your desk outside into the courtyard for the rest of the year? Im good with that. You dont seem too thrilled about it. And you shouldnt be, because its dumb. Just as dumb as the kids eating outside.

Higbie noted that teachers eat indoors and attend professional development without masks.

My kids gotta have this thing strapped to his face like a diaper all day. They go outside for five seconds they get yelled at to put it back on during recess.

I swear to God, if my kids going to be eating outside for one more day, its going to be real bad for you guys, Higbie added.

Another NMS parent, Susan Diana, said she wanted to provide a counter point. She thanked the NMS principal, vice principal and the entire teaching staff, noting they had kept children safe during the pandemic, dealt with the ceiling collapse at the school and necessity to relocate half the students to another location for the first half of the year.

We must not let the toxicity that is spewed in these meetings permeate our school, she continued. Im here to represent the majority of Greenwich parents to say thank you.

James Waters, a North Mianus parent and strong advocate for public schools, said in an email Friday morning, I think our community is tired of hearing the same small handful of people whining at Board of Education meetings. They speak loudly but carry small sticks, peddling false information gleaned from fringe websites, and sadly have now destroyed their own credibility. The rest of us are rolling up our sleeves and helping affect positive change while they howl at the moon. I feel sorry for them and hope theyll find a more productive way to make our community better going forward.

As an example, several people texted me about how sad it was that Mr. Higbie, a former Navy SEAL, was up there whining about the temperature in January, after having harassed the North Mianus principal during the day, when pretty much every other parent in the class he was referring to was completely fine with the school leaderships judgment.

Others who opposed the new public comment policy included Kristen Niemynski, who said the board should add opportunities for parents to speak out.

Instead of becoming more restrictive, the BOE should add a public speaking meeting or town hall every month where they give parents two to three hours to voice any concerns in a Q&A session, she suggested.

She went on to say, We do not want social justice and political issues embedded in the curriculum, Niemynski said. You are creating stress, anxiety, depression, feelings of isolation and segregation with your policies, and then you spend funding and steer everything toward social and emotional learning to fix the very problems your policies are causing.

Elizabeth Hopley said the public comment policy would give too much authority to the board chair.

There are a lot of very smart people in this room and in this town. If you ignore them its only to your detriment. Theyre here to inform and help you. And inform you they have, meeting after meeting, warning you of the harm being inflicted on children due to mask mandates, quarantines and coercive actions to promote Covid vaccines.

She said the district was practicing medicine without a license.

Roger Rosenthal made similar comments.

I have previously spoken against teaching our children to hate the country and themselves, as either oppressors or victims. Ive also spoken against the speaking of untruthsIve spoken about the importance of freedom of choice, including the ability to make the wrong decisions. Ive made them myself. I did get vaxxed and boostered, under pressure from my millennial sons. But they did tell me, Its your choice, and I made it.

Rosenthal said the board needed to be more accountable.

Last October, someone on the board mentioned theres no link between federal funding and any actions to be taken. Thats a false statement, he said. Its a bribe to go woke.

RTC chair, and Greenwich schools parent, Dan Quigley, thanked the board and administration.

Although we have seen school boards become politicized nationally, each of you deserves our respect for your service during these unique and difficult times, he said.

Dr. Jones, Im grateful for your steadfastness in keeping our kids in school. Most of the other superintendents in surrounding areas did not. This has, in my opinion, been the most important decision made during the pandemic, and its biggest beneficiaries are the children of the public school system.

The topic of students eating outdoors in winter came up again.

NMS parent Graeme Fattedad asked why children couldnt eat in their classrooms rather than sit on the floor in the hallway or outdoors? He said in response to his complaint, his daughter was given the option of eating indoors in the cafeteria, but other children didnt have the same choice.

On Tuesday, my daughters class was sent outside to eat lunch. It was 33 weather, with a 25MPH wind. Real feel 22F, Fattedad said. At what point is the risk of these children contracting Pneumonia supersede Covid? What about the dangers of falling branches or falling ice when children are we going to be worried about kids safety.

These are children, not dogs, and to be fair, my dog gets to eat inside. These children are being treated like criminals, he said, describing the situation as a prison mentality.

Board member Karen Kowalski asked about current practice of bringing children outdoors for lunch when its cold out.

Dr. Jones said there was no set policy, but rather common sense decisions made daily at the building level. She said when it is above freezing, children have always gone outdoors.

If children want to go outside, and generally when it is above freezing children do go outside, parents send them in coats and gloves. If for some reason they didnt have what they needed to be outside, the teacher wouldnt just take them outside.

Jones said a variety of outdoor spaces are utilized at lunchtime.

Do we want to take them out if its 30? No. And the children were not out in 30 weather. It was around 34 or 35 around 1:30 in the afternoonthey were inside a courtyard where you really cant feel the wind. There arent big icicles to fall on their heads.

Understand the teacher is there with them, she continued. Our teachers dont want to be outside if its really so cold its uncomfortableKids like to be outside. These teachers there were several of them who played outside that day and felt it was very comfortable.

BOE member Karen Kowalski said there was a difference between playing outside at recess with gloves on, versus eating ourdoors.

Why is the classroom not an option? she asked.

It is an option, Jones said. Teachers all across the district eat in classrooms. In a building referenced tonight, they dont use their cafeteria for lunch, they use the gymThere is a rotation. Its not the same every single day.

BOE member Joe Kelly said there should be more explicit rules about eating outdoors.

BOE member Karen Hirsh said while there was no policy, if parents knew their children might be eating outdoors, they could send them to school with warmer clothing.

This might be something that should be communicated to parents, she said.

It seems like a particularly poor example of judgement, said BOE member Cody Kittle. What should be done from an accountability standpoint?

It was not 30 and there was not a 30(mph) windchill, Dr. Jones said. We had several teachers who chose to eat in the courtyard on that particular day. We can certainly review that. But to say, a teachers poor judgement, when we werent there. The principal could see the courtyard.

I dont think that we stood in a place to be able to judge when we were not there, Jones continued. The principal has received other emails from parents who do not agree with the viewpoint presented tonight.

Dr. Jones said she would talk to the elementary school principals about eating outdoors and follow up.

The schools budget will be presented to the BET on Jan 25 via Zoom, with public comment invited live and in writing.

See the original post here:
BOE Public Comment Focuses on Free Speech, Students Eating Outdoors in the Cold - Greenwich Free Press

Editors note: This story appeared in theJanuary 2022 edition ofThe Daily Universe Magazine.

A small monument in an obscure park in Pleasant Grove, Utah, ignited a Supreme Court case on the clash between the free speech of private citizens and messages promoted by the government. The echoes are still being felt today in cases involving the maintaining or removal of Confederate monuments.

In the landmark 2009 case Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, a unanimous Court ruled a Ten Commandments monument in Pleasant Groves Pioneer Park as government speech instead of private speech. The decision also made it so the government could selectively choose which messages are memorialized in monuments in public parks.

Summum, a small religious sect based in Salt Lake City, brought a lawsuit against the city of Pleasant Grove for displaying the monument, and for declining a request to display a monument of Summums Seven Aphorisms.

The precedent from that case is being invoked in courtrooms across the Southeastern United States in battles over Confederate monuments.

According to a 2020 article in the Kentucky Law Journal by scholar Richard C. Schragger, the Pleasant Grove case could enable cities that want to get rid of Confederate monuments to overrule their state legislatures demands that the monuments stay. At the same time, cities that want to keep the monuments could oppose efforts to the contrary by claiming the monuments are government speech and their presence cannot be challenged under the First Amendment.

Schragger recorded that more than 1,000 Confederate monuments exist in the United States. Three of them sit in Charlottesville, Virginia, where a clash between groups of protesters in 2017 brought attention to ongoing issues of racial injustice. Virginia, Alabama, Tennessee and other states attempted to pass legislation so that cities in those states could not remove the monuments.

In the Pleasant Grove case, Summum claimed the Aphorisms are part of the higher law initially given to Moses on Mount Sinai before he was given the Ten Commandments. They include statements like Nothing rests; everything moves, everything vibrates and Summum is mind, thought; the universe is a mental creation. Practices of the religion, founded in 1975 by Claude Corky Newell, include the Egyptian-inspired practice of mummification and meditation on the aphorisms.

Summum argued that because the city of Pleasant Grove denied their request to erect their Seven Aphorisms monument, the city was inhibiting their free speech, and discriminating in favor of the Christian religion. The Tenth Circuit court agreed, reversing an initial decision made by a district court, saying that because public parks are public forums, the government was not allowed to accept a request to place one monument and deny a request to place another.

The Supreme Court reversed the decision again, unanimously deciding that monuments are government speech, and the government has the right to choose which messages take up limited space in public parks. The Ten Commandments Monument, donated by an organization with longstanding ties to the community and representing the historical pioneer heritage of the area, did not need to be removed and the Summum monument was not required to be accepted.

The Court argued that though activities like distributing leaflets or giving talks in a public park are protected under the free speech clause, the same protection does not extend to monuments.

I mean, you have a Statue of Liberty; do we have to have a statue of despotism? Chief Justice John Roberts asked during the oral arguments in favor of Summum. Or do we have to put any president who wants to be on Mount Rushmore?

Pamela Harris, the lawyer presenting oral argument for Summum, saidPleasant Grove should issue a statement publicly claiming that the monument was the official speech of the city, if the Ten Commandments monument was indeed government speech. Justice Samuel Alito pushed back.

If somebody came up to you and said Id like to put up a monument in your front yard, and you said sure go ahead, do that, arent you accepting that, whatever the monument says, in a sense? Similarly, the judges decided a monument in a public park was government speech. The city of Pleasant Grove won the case 9-0.

What is government speech?

Government speech, the ability of the government to not merely regulate speech but also to participate in it, is a relatively recent development in First Amendment jurisprudence. It began in 1990 with the case Rust v. Sullivan, when the Court ruled that if the government is the speaker, it cant be found guilty of First Amendment violations such as viewpoint discrimination. Traditionally the governments role has been to protect the speech of those who are marginalized, not to void speech by participating in the conversation itself.

The ability of government speech may not always be a negative thing: In 2003, the infamous Reverend Fred Phelps wanted to erect a statue of Matthew Shepard, the gay University of Wyoming student who was tortured and murdered, in a historic plaza in Casper, Wyoming. The epitaph would say: Matthew Shepard entered Hell October 12, 1998 According to the government speech doctrine, the city of Casper is free to decline Phelps request.

Government speech means that not everyone will have a monument in a public park and indeed, some organizations like Summum, with little representation in a city like Pleasant Grove, may not but it also means the statues that are memorialized will supposedly be representative of the entire city.

However, government speech is also extremely broad and at times difficult to distinguish from private speech.

In Rust, government speech involved the ability of government-funded healthcare workers to recommend abortion, but Summum said privately donated monuments on government property constituted government speech. A later case, Texas v. Walker Division of Sons of Confederate Veterans, said privately-sponsored images on government-issued license plates were government speech.

As legal scholar Helen Norton noted, government speech goes beyond the easily-recognizable State of the Union address and congressional resolutions government speech is also Smoky Bear, warning us that Only you can prevent wildfires.

The Transparency Principle

BYU law professor John Fee said problems with accountability can arise when the government initially doesnt claim a message as their own speech, but then later claims government speech when they get sued, in order to protect itself from free speech claims.

In the case of Pleasant Grove, Fee said the city may have been reluctant to claim the Ten Commandments monument as government speech because of concerns with the Establishment Clause, but chose to do so after Summum brought the lawsuit.

You dont want a government thats trying to have it both ways, where they are essentially creating a forum that is available to some people, but if they get sued, their lawyers simply claim government speech, Fee said.

Fee said if government is upfront about when it is speaking, citizens will know whom to hold accountable. Norton calls this the transparency principle and argues that if individuals know when the government is speaking, they can hold the government accountable for the messages it chooses to promote by using the political process.

Under this transparency principle, the government is not free to claim the government speech defense to a First Amendment challenge unless it has made the contested messages governmental source clear to the public, Norton said.

Application to Confederate and other monuments

Claiming the government is violating the Free Speech clause by allowing some statues in public parks and not others (for example, Confederate generals rather than Civil Rights heroes) is unlikely to work, based on the ruling of Pleasant Grove. The city will likely make the government speech claim and exempt itself from free speech clause scrutiny.

This is why Fee says the transparency principle becomes important: If city and state governments are transparent about whether memorials constitute messages from government officials or private individuals, citizens can take action. They know where to apply political pressure. In cases of government speech, people can vote public servants out of office when they promote messages the citizenry finds offensive.

If the transparency principle is applied, Fee said government speech doctrine as laid down by the Supreme Court, has the potential to make government more responsible to the desires and preferences of its citizens, because city and state governments will have to own the messages they promote.

Pay attention to what messages your own government is sending and take responsibility for those, Fee said. Speech is powerful, and government speech is powerful. Ultimately, its in the control of the people, and we are responsible for the content of whatever the government speaks.

See the original post:
Case stemming from Utah County 'Ten Commandments' monument now being invoked in Confederate statue disputes - The Daily Universe - Universe.byu.edu

Should a teacher be allowed to place a Black Lives Matter sticker on their desk to let students know they oppose racism, or hang a Pride flag from their door to let their LGBTQ students know the classroom is a safe space?

Or are those actions another way for teachers to politically influence and divide students?

Across the country in recent months, board members, administrators, and teachers have been at odds over the express purpose of Black Lives Matter logos and Pride flags and what free speech rights teachers have when it comes to decorating their classrooms.

Dozens of educators across the country have recently been asked and ordered to take down stickers, posters, banners, and flags containing those symbols, according to media reports.

One such district is Newberg, Ore., where a school communitys divided opinions on whether Pride flags and Black Lives Matter symbols are signs of support for historically marginalized students or political and inflammatory symbols has resulted in multiple lawsuits, a superintendents firing, protests, and, most recently, board member recall elections.

Elsewhere, districts in Indiana, Nevada, and Utah have all banned teachers from displaying the Pride flag or Black Lives Matter symbols, or both, in schools since November 2020.

In September 2020, a teacher in Texas was fired after she refused to stop wearing her Black Lives Matter face mask, CBS Austin reported.

Last fall, a teacher in Iowa was put on administrative leave after he included the Pride flag in a presentation about images that described him and told students when asked that he was bisexual, according to the Des Moines Register.

And in September 2021, a teacher in Missouri resigned after being forced to take down a Pride flag in his classroom and forced to sign a letter prohibiting him from discussing sexuality or sexual preference, according to USA Today.

In Newberg, the uproar started when school board members issued a directive at an August 2021 meeting ordering the superintendent to enforce removal of all Black Lives Matter and Pride flag posters, banners, stickers, pins, and clothing from school buildings.

A month later, the board scrapped the policy based on legal advice and passed a new iteration which banned all symbols that can be considered political, quasi-political, or controversial.

Weve hijacked a beautiful rainbow sticker into something different. It is political, Newberg school board chair Dave Brown, who voted for the ban, said during a school board meeting last summer. These things are dividing our schools.

The districts teachers union, along with the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, has sued, calling the ban arbitrary, confusing and an infringement on teachers free speech. Andrew Gallagher, a high school history teacher and a plaintiff in the teachers union lawsuit, said that he believes the board members agenda is driven by a national movement to censor conversations about race and gender in the classroom.

The vagueness around the definitions of controversial and political have caused confusion among educators, Gallagher said.

Whos going to be the arbiter of what is considered controversial? he said. And it creates a chilling effect for our staff, which does impede on our free speech.

At the August board meeting, several parents urged the board to reconsider the directive, but a few were in support of the ban on Black Lives Matter and Pride flags.

Newberg parent Raquel Peregrino de Britoa said LGBTQ propaganda causes gender dysphoria, BLM is designed to be divisive and schools should instead be about math and reading.

There are only two genders and all lives matter, she said during a school board meeting in August, according to a recording. The BLM and LGBTQ ideology and curriculum are shattering the innocence of children, promoting racial divide, and negatively impacting the lives of our kids forever.

Generally speaking, teachers have few rights when it comes to free speech in the classroom, said, Richard Geisel, a lawyer and professor of educational leadership at Grand Valley State University in Michigan. A school board has the right to tell teachers what they can or cant do if its trying to eliminate disruption to learning, assuming the boards policies come from a neutral perspective, he said.

In Newbergs case, the first policy the school board passed in August 2021 that specifically banned rainbow flags and Black Lives Matter symbols would likely have been discriminatory, Geisel said.

If their policy just singles out certain viewpoints and is not generally applicable, thats problematic, he said.

Its newest policy that bans political or controversial symbols might be much harder to challenge, Geisel said.

I think its pretty typical to go into a public school these days and find those symbols for those express purposes, of helping all students feel included and welcome, Geisel said. But to what extent are they both messages of inclusion, as well as potentially political statements? I dont know the answer to that. Its going to be interesting for the court to wrestle with that.

For students of color and LGBTQ students, who disproportionately experience discrimination in school buildings, symbols such as a Black Lives Matter poster or a Pride flag can be useful tools for navigating their social and physical surroundings, according to Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, the interim executive director of GLSEN, an LGBTQ awareness and inclusion advocacy group.

LGBTQ students experience stronger academic outcomes as well as more positive emotional and mental health outcomes when schools are inclusive and affirming, Willingham-Jaggers said.

And its visible displays of support for LGBTQ students like Pride flags [that] are all critical components of creating a kind of welcoming environment that helps young people be successful in schools, she said.

The Black Lives Matter hashtag is perceived by many educators to serve a similar function. It was created in 2013 in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martins murderer, George Zimmerman. The movement gained traction as Black Lives Matter became the rallying cry of protests against police brutality across the country that followed George Floyds murder in 2020.

Its really only controversial if you think that if you believe in white supremacy, Willingham-Jaggers said. If only white folks belong in our schools and only white folks need to be comfortable or have their identity affirmed, a Pride flag and BLM poster disrupts that comfort.

The two symbols can become flashpoints in communities already divided.

Newbergs school board, student activists and teachers has been at loggerheads over the last two years over how to fight racism and homophobia within the district.

The communty had already dealt with incidents including a white Newberg teacher who showed up to school in blackface and a student who posted racial slurs and homophobic comments to a Snapchat group called Slave Trade.

In 2020, Newberg passed two resolutions condemning racism and promising to make all students feel welcome. For the rest of the school year, teachers displayed rainbow flags or Black Lives Matter posters without disruption to the education environment, the Newberg Education Association lawsuit said.

As the 2021 school year began, however, four board memberstwo of them newly electedpushed to ban Pride flags and Black Lives Matter symbols in Newberg schools. After two months of fierce debate between board members and the school community, the four board members passed the ban in a 4-3 vote and issued a directive to the superintendent to make sure all flags, banners, posters and stickers associated with Black Lives Matter and Pride were removed from Newberg schools.

Some community members organized rallies protesting the ban. They built plywood Pride flags and Black Lives Matter signs and displayed them on a hill within view of Newberg High School. They continued voicing dissent at board meetings, but the ban stayed.

Some building leaders, such as District Mountainview principal Terry McElligot were already making changes in their buildings. The principal told a school counselor to take down the Pride flag in the counseling office, according to the lawsuit. The next day, at a staff meeting, the lawsuit said she told her employees I dont want any of you telling students its ok to be gay or trans.

The district did not respond to requests for comment.

In September, Superintendent Joe Morelock informed the board, after consulting with the school attorney, that enforcing the ban would be unconstitutional. The board then rescinded the directive and issued a new policy, this time the blanket ban on anything political, quasi-political or controversial, without offering much explanation as to what that might entail.

Two months later, Morelock was fired. Many in the Newberg community protested again. The teachers union filed its lawsuit, and a recall effort for the chair and vice chair of the board was initiated. Both board members did not respond to requests for comment.

Currently, the town is the site of prolonged protests by those who believe the values represented by the Black Lives Matter posters and Pride flags have a place in Newberg.

Some teachers still hang those flags on their classroom doors, according to Brandy Penner, a board member who has spoken out against the ban since the first board discussion.

Local business owners display these symbols in their businesses to show their solidarity to Black, brown and LGBTQ students and teachers.

But as the fate of both the ACLU and the teachers association lawsuits remains uncertain, the ban on political symbols stays.

It has now transcended this cultural war of pride and BLM to be more like, no, but who are we as a community? Penner said. It is asinine to think you can suppress people to a point where they will no longer be able to express their Pride.

See more here:
Pride Flags and Black Lives Matter Signs in the Classroom: Supportive Symbols or Propaganda? - Education Week