School boards face lawsuits, recalls for censoring public comments on hot-button issues. Encouragement to get involved locally. You can make a difference, only if you are involved.

1.4K

•

School boards face lawsuits, recalls for censoring public comments on hot-button issues. Encouragement to get involved locally. You can make a difference, only if you are involved. (justthenews.com)

Federal judge suspends Pennsylvania school district's vague policy on prohibited speech while considering whether to hold officials personally liable.

As school boards nationwide crack down on public comments about COVID-19, race and gender policies at their meetings, some speakers are taking to the courts and the political process to ensure that censorship carries a price.

Pennsylvania school districts are reeling from a preliminary injunction issued last month against a policy that prohibits speech the school board deems "offensive," "intolerant," "verbally abusive" or "irrelevant," among other vague terms.

U.S. District Judge Gene Pratter also banned the Pennsbury School Board from requiring speakers to announce their address before giving remarks.

The Institute for Free Speech (IFS), which is representing community members, including a former school board member, who have been "repeatedly censored," is now trying to hold district and board officials personally liable for First Amendment violations.

The government officials told Pratter in a reply brief this month that they have qualified immunity because the plaintiffs weren't "excluded" from public meetings, meaning there was no "clearly established" right violated at the time.

The judge is known for her scuttled nomination to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy blocked it 13 years ago, citing allegations that Pratter was hostile to civil rights plaintiffs.

Her Nov. 17 memorandum suspending the "challenged policy terms" opens by quoting the play "Inherit the Wind," a fictionalized version of the 1925 Scopes "monkey" trial about the teaching of evolution in public schools. "You don't suppose this kind of thing is ever finished, do you?" a character says.

Among the incidents cited: The Pennsbury board edited out a public comment by one plaintiff from a meeting video, saying he sounded racist "dog whistles." At a subsequent meeting an official interrupted three plaintiffs for "abusive and irrelevant" comments about the district's equity program, shouting "You're done!" repeatedly at each of them.

Pratter noted the district had subsequently brought in law enforcement personnel during meetings, suggesting an active chilling effect.

Because Pennsbury is not backing down, an eventual final ruling would apply to every school board within the Eastern District of Pennsylvania's jurisdiction, from Philadelphia to Lancaster.

Federal judge suspends Pennsylvania school district's vague policy on prohibited speech while considering whether to hold officials personally liable. As school boards nationwide crack down on public comments about COVID-19, race and gender policies at their meetings, some speakers are taking to the courts and the political process to ensure that censorship carries a price. Pennsylvania school districts are reeling from a preliminary injunction issued last month against a policy that prohibits speech the school board deems "offensive," "intolerant," "verbally abusive" or "irrelevant," among other vague terms. U.S. District Judge Gene Pratter also banned the Pennsbury School Board from requiring speakers to announce their address before giving remarks. The Institute for Free Speech (IFS), which is representing community members, including a former school board member, who have been "repeatedly censored," is now trying to hold district and board officials personally liable for First Amendment violations. The government officials told Pratter in a reply brief this month that they have qualified immunity because the plaintiffs weren't "excluded" from public meetings, meaning there was no "clearly established" right violated at the time. The judge is known for her scuttled nomination to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy blocked it 13 years ago, citing allegations that Pratter was hostile to civil rights plaintiffs. Her Nov. 17 memorandum suspending the "challenged policy terms" opens by quoting the play "Inherit the Wind," a fictionalized version of the 1925 Scopes "monkey" trial about the teaching of evolution in public schools. "You don't suppose this kind of thing is ever finished, do you?" a character says. Among the incidents cited: The Pennsbury board edited out a public comment by one plaintiff from a meeting video, saying he sounded racist "dog whistles." At a subsequent meeting an official interrupted three plaintiffs for "abusive and irrelevant" comments about the district's equity program, shouting "You're done!" repeatedly at each of them. Pratter noted the district had subsequently brought in law enforcement personnel during meetings, suggesting an active chilling effect. Because Pennsbury is not backing down, an eventual final ruling would apply to every school board within the Eastern District of Pennsylvania's jurisdiction, from Philadelphia to Lancaster.

(post is archived)