Posted on 07/22/2024 11:01:41 AM PDT by John Semmens
In California, after a lesson on Martin Luther King Jr and Black Lives Matter, a first grade girl drew a picture with four ovals she said were the faces of herself and her friends holding hands. One was white. One was black. One was Brown. One was yellow. The the phrases "Black Lives Matter" with "any lives" right under "Black Lives" accompanied the drawing. She gave it to a classmate. The classmate thanked her and took it home. The next day that classmate's mother expressed her concern to Viejo Elementary School Principal Jesus Becerra that her daughter was being singled out for her race.
Becerra concluded that adding "any lives" was "inconsistent with values taught in the school" and that the drawing was "racist" and "inappropriate." Both he and the mother who raised the issue agreed that the student who wrote the words and drew the picture was innocent of any malice. The mother said she did not want her daughter's friend to be punished. Becerra disagreed. First he forced the girl who drew the picture to apologize to the friend she gave it to. This confused both girls. Becerra then banned the girl who loves to draw from giving any pictures to any of her classmates. Her teachers then barred her from participating in recess for two weeks.
A year later the punished girl's mother found out about it. She requested an explanation and an apology for the violation of her daughter's First Amendment right to freedom of speech. She got neither. The school claimed Becerra had immunity against the girl's First Amendment and retaliation claims.
The mother then filed suit in the Federal District Court. This court ruled against her claim, speciously citing a US Supreme Court ruling that "schools may restrict speech that might reasonably lead school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities or that collides with the rights of other students to be secure and let alone." Only a moron could "reasonably" forecast that a drawing by a first grade student showing girls of different races holding hands substantially disrupted or materially interfered with school activities or collided with the rights of other students to be secure.
The District Court court also added "the use of the phrase 'any lives' is unacceptably similar to the phrase 'all lives,' which in the state of California is considered hate speech. Hate speech also lacks the protection of the First Amendment regardless of the age of the person who uses it."
Since the Federal District Court's ruling and the Supreme Court precedent cited conflict with another Supreme Court ruling that "First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students who do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," the Pacific Legal Foundation appealing the case at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In other California school news, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed AB 1955--the Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today's Youth Act. This law forbids schools from informing parents when their child decides to change his or her gender. A recent Rasmussen poll found that an overwhelming majority of California voters support parental notification policies. Unfortunately, California voters also elected enough Democrats to give them super-majorities in both houses of the state legislature. This allows Democrats to ignore the will of the majority of California voters on this issue.
If you missed any of the other Semi-News/Semi-Satire posts you can find them at...
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,537231.0.html
If this is true, why does the Dung Beetle Party and KIndergarten Rockers and Tik Tokers think they should be able to vote? Hhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm???????
WTF is wrong with the mother who reported this? Children are innocent of their parents bias, until they are trained by their parents to have a bias. This 1st grade student has just been taught by our incredibly dysfunctional and woke system that NOW skin tone and color matter, but only when someone can claim they are offended.
This judge is a complete moron, and should be removed from the bench and prevented from making any decisions, except for himself! Adults are free to be stupid! Children should be encourages to think freely!
I really want to see this get appealed.
California still has the death penalty. I don’t see a child who’s done something. This terrible should be spared.
I have read the First Amendment and Leonard W. Levy’s book titled The Origins of the Bill of Rights. Age is not mentioned anywhere as a qualification. Personal liberties can be terribly messy, but that price must be paid to recover our lost Republic. Everyone needs to be prepared to be offended.
From the outset, I am not convinced that a first-grader in California could actually write “any lives” without some help.
...UNLESS they are here illegally.
I recognize that it’s satire, however... why shouldn’t children be denied their 1A rights? After all, children in utero are denied the right to life.
I’m reminded of the defendant who, learning he wouldn’t get probation, launched himself at the judge. We might need more of that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.