These laws are not based on medical science nor on any evidence of the conspiracies to turn cis kids into trans kids. That doesn’t happen any more than straight kids get turned gay by seeing a rainbow flag or reading a book with LGBTQIA characters. No these laws are based on bigotry and religious doctrines. How many times do you hear anti-trans people say god doesn’t make mistakes, so you have to be the gender of your body. But they said the same thing about people being gay decades ago, that people couldn’t be born gay because god did make mistakes. Guess what, it is not a mistake to be gay if you are gay and it is not a mistake to be trans if you identify as a gender different from what is showing between your legs. It is ignorance, hate, bigotry, and religious indoctrination masquerading as fake concern for “the children”. Hugs. Scottie
“Transgender children should receive equal treatment under the law. Parents should have the right to make the most fundamental decisions about how to care for their children,” Winmill said in his ruling.
“Every family wants what is best for their children, and families who love and accept their transgender youth are no different,” Li Nowlin-Sohl, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project said in a statement. “These dangerous efforts to control our bodies and our families threaten the well-being of trans youth, the strength of our communities, and the ability of every family to determine what’s best for their child.”
“This victory is significant for Idaho transgender youth and their parents,” one advocate said.
A federal court ruled on Tuesdaythat an Idaho law prohibiting doctors from providing transgender minors with access to gender-affirming care is likely unconstitutional and blockedthe law from taking effect. The gender-affirming healthcare ban, which was originally planned to go into effect on January 1, would have made providing puberty blockers and hormone therapies to transgender youth a felony.
“This victory is significant for Idaho transgender youth and their parents, and will have an immediate positive impact on their daily lives,” Leo Morales, executive director of the ACLU of Idaho, said in a statement.
Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho heldthat Idaho’s anti-trans law likely violated the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment.
“Transgender children should receive equal treatment under the law. Parents should have the right to make the most fundamental decisions about how to care for their children,” Winmill said in his ruling.
RELATED STORY
“Every family wants what is best for their children, and families who love and accept their transgender youth are no different,” Li Nowlin-Sohl, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project said in a statement. “These dangerous efforts to control our bodies and our families threaten the well-being of trans youth, the strength of our communities, and the ability of every family to determine what’s best for their child.”
Another plaintiff in the lawsuit, Pam Poe, a 15-year-old trans girl, “struggled with depression, anxiety and self-harm” before receiving gender-affirming care which “greatly improved” her mental health. If the gender-affirming healthcare ban went into effect, her and her family would have considered leaving the state.
“This judicial decision is a much-needed ray of hope for trans people amid a years-long onslaught against their rights to access health care and ability to navigate the world around them,” Morales said in a press release. “Everyone should be free to live and thrive in their authentic identity, which means transgender people should not be shut out of accessing medically sound health care.”
Idaho is one of 22 states that have restricted or banned transgender youth from accessing gender-affirming care, according to the Movement Advancement Project(MAP). In a recent report, MAP described the gender-affirming healthcare bans as part of a “war against LGBTQ people in America and their very right and ability to openly exist.” While many of these bans have been temporarily blocked by the courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixthand EleventhCircuits have reversed lower court injunctions, allowing bans in Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama to go into effect.
Research by the Trevor Projectshows that debates around anti-trans bills negatively affect transgender and nonbinary youth’s mental health and a majority of those trans youth (55 percent) said anti-trans bills “very negatively” affected their mental health. Gender-affirming healthcare bans don’t just hurt transgender and nonbinary people, but also affect the health and well-being of LGBTQ+ adults, according to a Human Rights Campaign poll. The poll found that 8 in 10 LGBTQ adults said that the bans made them feel less safe and “worsen[ed] harmful stereotypes, discrimination, hate and stigma.”
A MESSAGE FROM TRUTHOUT’S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
For 22 years, Truthout has been a platform for new and daring ideas, uplifting voices and producing trailblazing, award-winning journalism. The stories we’ve published over the last two decades have been read by tens of millions of people and inspired the conversations and actions that are necessary for social change.
But to continue publishing meaningful, powerful, inspiring journalism, we still need to raise $65,000 before December 31st — and for a limited time, any donation you make will be matched, dollar for dollar.
This fundraiser is our most important drive, and the perfect time to make your end-of-year donation. Your support is both vitally needed, and deeply appreciated, so if you’re in a position to give, please make your tax-deductible gift today.
Gender-affirming care is not mutilating kids genitals. That is male circumcision in babies. Gender-affirming care is not a sudden thing where an 8 or 9 year old kid walks in to a doctor’s office and tells the people at the desk they need puberty blockers, hormones, and sexual reassignment surgery scheduled for next week please. Oh and do you have any apps / phone games I can download?
Gender affirming care saves lives! That is a fact! Gender affirming care is careful medical exams and phycological assessment. The care for younger kids includes letting them dress as the gender they identify as and to wear the hair and accessories that gender uses. Only as the child nears puberty or it is determined to be starting, are they given puberty blockers, which are safe and reversible. They are well studied and used for a very long time worldwide. If the kid decides they do not want to transition, they can stop the puberty blockers and they enter puberty as they would have before.
Only when the older teen has lived as the gender they identify as for a while and nears adulthood is any surgery discussed, and it is very rare to only in cases of great need is it considered before the age of 18. Normal age of sexual reassignment surgery is early 20s.
Why are these anti-trans bills clearly discriminatory? Because they only deny puberty blockers, hormones, and surgery to trans kids and for transitioning. The laws state that they can be used on cis kids, including the often used breast surgery to enlarge female cis kid’s boobies, normally around 16. Also other body changing surgeries for cis kids are allowed like rhinoplasty which is nose reshaping surgery. Also cis kids at very young teen years are allowed to have their ears reshaped for looks. See how the laws target trans kids and are not based on medical science? If puberty blockers were so harmful and non-reversible, why are they allowed for cis kids then? Think on it? It is like the anti-sodomy laws in Texas found to be illegal. They said anal sex between a male and female were OK, but anal sex between two males were illegal. Same with oral sex, it is OK between a male and female but illegal between two females or two males. WTF! See the bigotry and hate? That is why the courts ruled the laws were illegal. Hugs. Scottie
Myriam and Cameron in NCLR’s “Healthcare is Caring” PSA.Photo: Screenshot
The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) is combating anti-trans misinformation with a campaign that’s all about love and care.
Last month, the non-profit public interest law firm, which advocates for LGBTQ+ rights, launched its “Healthcare is Caring” campaign with a short PSA directed by Emmy-nominated filmmaker Zen Pace. The clip features the voices of trans teens reading letters to their parents describing their experiences of coming out and the impact their parents’ support had on them.
The ACLU is trying to stop a ban from going into effect.
It ends with a poignant and timely message: “The thing our kids have always needed is care.”
“This film is special to me because not only does it touch my community, but it helps put forward a much more accurate story of these families that simply doesn’t exist out there,” Pace said in a statement. “It gives space to these parents; it’s a gift from their children.”
According to The Drum, NCLR’s “Healthcare is Caring” campaign was developed with the help of public relations and marketing consultancy firm Edelman. The firm’s data and intelligence division conducted a study on how misinformation about gender-affirming care spreads online. It found that a disproportionately small number of voices have driven anti-trans discourse, leading to a wave of state laws and local restrictions that have banned gender-affirming care for young people and severely limited trans people’s ability to exist openly and safely in the public sphere.
NCLR has been combating such legislation. The firm has challenged laws banning gender-affirming care for minors in Alabama, Florida, and Kentucky. After the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld state bans in Kentucky and Tennessee, the NCLR filed a petition on November 3 urging the Supreme Court to review the decision. The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, and Lambda Legal have also asked the Supreme Court to review the Tennessee decision. If the justices agree to hear the case, it would be the first time a case involving gender-affirming care has ever come before the court.
As part of the “Healthcare” is Caring campaign, NCLR is urging supporters to sign an open letter calling on elected leaders to ensure equal access to gender-affirming care — which is recognized by every major American medical association as evidence-based, safe, and often necessary for the treatment of gender dysphoria. The letter calls on elected officials to put an end to both legal bans and the false narratives characterizing this lifesaving health care as “child abuse.”
The campaign’s hub on NCLR’s website also features more info about the families featured in the PSA, including the full text of their letters.
“The families in our campaign, like so many other families with transgender children, are proof that helping transgender youth get medically needed care can enable them to lead happy and successful lives,” NCLR legal director Shannon Minter said in a statement. “Still, many legislators continue to push harmful policies that prevent these young people from getting the healthcare they need and deserve. We’re working to take action against these bills and show the politicians behind them that transgender youth and their families are not alone.”
The fundamentalist Christians and the maga right can not tolerate positive affirming media about LGBTQIA, independent women, or black people because it ruins their narrative. They want to push the idea that women need men to function and be whole, that blacks are lazy and less intelligent, and that the LGBTQIA are evil incarnate that will destroy everything good in the country / world and god hates them, so god will take it out on everyone if they are treated decently. They are desperate to push the 1950s social narrative that white men are good, the Christian god is the right and only god in public, and that cis straight is normal so every thing else is an abhorrent abomination. They are wrong and stuck in a regressive oppressive past, unable to let others enjoy the modern world. They are modern Amish, only they demand that everyone live like them. Without positive reinforcement the lives of LGBTQIA and minority kids are much harder, much more anxiety ridden, much more unpleasant. Kids learn to hate themselves. They learn that others hate them and are free to attack them. So they either keep hidden, missing out on great times straight cis kids are having along with a much higher risk of suicide. Hugs
M4L is a nationwide “parental rights” organization. Like Truth and Liberty, M4L strives to take over and transform public school boards in their own Christian “conservative” image. The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated M4L as an extremist group due to their anti-LGBTQ+ policies and ties to the Proud Boys, which led the assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.
Wallnau also popularized the “seven mountains” mandate trumpeted by Truth and Liberty. The mandate is a supposedly divine strategy used by Christian supremacists in order to achieve societal dominion for God, as I’ve reported previously. They seek control over these seven “mountains” or “spheres”: business, government, family, religion, media, entertainment, and education.
Clearly racism and bigotry. They even rescinded anti-discrimination policies. Why not discriminating is good, discrimination is bad. But we can thank tRump for making it safe for these … people to come out from under the rocks and openly push for white supremacy. Their goal is to push the LGBTQIA out of public view and remove any equality for black / brown people. Read the quote below and see if you can find the real truth he is saying.
Cook, in July, defended rescinding the anti-racism resolution, saying the board “doesn’t need to be in the business of dividing the community.”
Why would anti-racism divide the community unless a lot of the white community wants to be racist against the black community, and the whites feel targeted / put on by the resolution. Hugs. Scottie
O’FALLON, Mo. (AP) — A conservative-led Missouri school board has voted to drop elective courses on Black history and literature, five months after the same boardrescinded an anti-discrimination policyadopted in the aftermath of the killing ofGeorge Floyd.
The Francis Howell School Board voted 5-2 Thursday night to stop offering Black History and Black Literature, courses that had been offered at the district’s three high schools since 2021. A little over 100 students took the courses this semester in the predominantly white suburban area of St. Louis.
In July, the board revoked an anti-racism resolution and ordered copies removed from school buildings. The resolution was adopted in August 2020 amid the national turmoil after a police officer killed Floyd in Minneapolis.
The resolution pledged that the Francis Howell community would “speak firmly against any racism, discrimination, and senseless violence against people regardless of race, ethnicity, nationality, immigration status, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, or ability.”
The resolution and course offerings were targeted by five new members who have taken control of the board since being elected last year and in April, all with the backing of the conservative political action committee Francis Howell Families. All seven board members are white.
The PAC’s website expresses strong opposition to the courses, saying they involve principals of critical race theory, though many experts say the scholarly theory centered on the idea that racism is systemic in the nation’s institutions is not taught in K-12 schools.
The decision to drop the courses was met with protests outside the board meeting. Several parents and students chanted, “Let them learn!” Inside, speakers questioned the decision.
“You’ve certainly taught me to not underestimate how low you will go to show your disdain toward the Black and brown communities’ experiences and existence,” Harry Harris, a Black father, told the board.
Another speaker, Tom Ferri, urged the board to focus on bigger issues such as high turnover among teachers.
“Tapping into a diverse talent pipeline would be a great way to slow attrition, but what diverse staff wants to work in a district waging culture wars?” he asked.
Board Vice President Randy Cook Jr., who was elected in 2022, said the Francis Howell courses to which he and others objected used “Social Justice Standards” developed by the Southern Poverty Law Center with a bent toward activism.
“I do not object to teaching black history and black literature; but I do object to teaching black history and black literature through a social justice framework,” Cook said in an email on Friday. “I do not believe it is the public school’s responsibility to teach social justice and activism.”
District spokesperson Jennifer Jolls said in an email that new Black history and literature courses “could be redeveloped and brought to the Board for approval in the future.”
This semester, 60 students at the three schools combined enrolled in the Black History course, and 42 took Black Literature, the district said.
Francis Howell is among Missouri’s largest school districts, with 16,647 students, 7.7% of whom are Black. The district is on the far western edge of the St. Louis area, in St. Charles County.
The county’s dramatic growth has coincided with the equally dramatic population decline in St. Louis city. In 1960, St. Louis had 750,000 residents and St. Charles County had 53,000. St. Louis’ population is now 293,000, nearly evenly split between Black and white residents. St. Charles County has grown to about 415,000 residents, 6% of whom are Black.
Racial issues remain especially sensitive in the St. Louis region, more than nine years after a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri,fatally shot 18-year-old Michael Brownduring a street confrontation. Officer Darren Wilson was not charged and the shooting led to months of often violent protests, becoming a catalyst for the national Black Lives Matter movement.
Cook, in July, defended rescinding the anti-racism resolution, saying the board “doesn’t need to be in the business of dividing the community.”
“We just need to stick to the business of educating students here and stay out of the national politics,” he said.
The district’s description of the Black Literature course says it focuses “on contemporary and multi-genre literary works of Black authors and will celebrate the dignity and identity of Black voices.”
For the Black History course, the description reads, “Students understand the present more thoroughly when they understand the roots of today’s world in light of their knowledge of the past. This Black History course tells the history of Blacks from the beginning Ancient Civilizations of Africa through the present day accomplishments and achievements of Black individuals today.”
School board elections across the U.S. have become intense political battlegrounds since 2020, when some groups began pushing back against policies aimed at stemming the spread of COVID-19.
PACs in many local districts have successfully elected candidates who promised to take action against teachings on race and sexuality, remove books deemed offensive and stop transgender-inclusive sports teams.
Never ceases to amaze me that a word generally understood to mean “not asleep,” “awake” is the worst epithet that Trump and his thugs can throw at progressives.
It just shows how entrenched they are in their dogma they are, that equality is so undesirable. They are incapable of considering anything that challenges their bigotry
I recall reading about a journalist who asked a bunch of Trump supporters what “woke” means to them. The replies were hysterical.
Half of them really didn’t have any idea what it means. The other half used the usual “commie, socialist, atheist, homo” description they use when describing anyone or anything they don’t like or don’t understand.
It was first used by white liberals to mean “I’m listening to women, black, hispanic, lgbt, etc. voices and hearing what they are saying.” How horrible. To acknowledge other people’s lived experiences and treat them with respect.
Yep, in the city of Saint Louis , in the gated private streets of 1904 Worlds Fair era mansions just north of the large city park where the Fair was held. Private streets are really private, they don’t allow (certain) non-residents to walk or drive there – the streets hire private security. I have lived about 2 blocks from idiot gun-toters’ house for over 30 years, in a neighborhood of pre-WWII high rise apartment buildings. 1904 World’s Fair is the one immortalized in the Judy Garland movie Meet Me in St. Louis. “Have yourself a merry little Christmas…”
Yes, it’s population boomed, growing more than four-fold in the ’50s. O’Fallon, MO, should not to be confused with O’Fallon, IL or the O’Fallon neighborhood in north St. Louis, all within the same metro and named after the same rail baron. The O’Fallon neighborhood was hard-hit by block-busting, white-flight, and subsequent red-lining. It’s to recent to be allowed to publish the individual household records to see how many moved from the O’Fallon neighborhood to what is now the largest, and exceedingly white, suburb of St. Louis.
Think about the line that the school claims is unacceptable. “Wouldn’t it be nice to live in paradise… where we’re free to be exactly who we are.” That is what the school district finds so unacceptable. Why? It must be something to do with demanding everyone must live by the church doctrines of the minority. Hugs. Scottie
A federal court in Wisconsin declined to dismiss a teacher’s First Amendment retaliation claim against the school district that fired her for publishing a tweet critical of its decision to prohibit her first-graders from singing “Rainbowland” by Miley Cyrus and Dolly Parton at a school concert. She has shown that her employment was terminated for exercising her First Amendment rights, so her claim survives the motion.
A Wisconsin school board has banned the song “Rainbowland” by Dolly Parton & Miley Cyrus from a concert because they say the lyrics are “controversial.” The song says, “Wouldn’t it be nice to live in paradise… where we're free to be exactly who we are.” https://t.co/I5GRTpv44P
— No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen (@NoLieWithBTC) March 24, 2023
First-grade teacher @melissatempel was fired last week after she publicly criticized the Waukesha, Wisconsin, board of education for not allowing students to sing the song “Rainbowland,” citing a “controversial content policy.” “It was really horrifying,” says Tempel. pic.twitter.com/8wQzukuNFq
I never heard of the song and never heard it, either, but I just looked up the lyrics.
in those lyrics, there is not a single mention of race, gender, sex, sexuality, religion, ethnicity, or even a bigotry. All of those are the usual sources for bigotry, and thus of “controversy”.So what exactly is the problem?
Who knew that a plea for tolerance could be considered “controversial”, except to the highly and terminally intolerant?
We just want things to be the way they used to be — when you people were invisible and uppity brown folk knew how to hold their tongue. Just like white Jesus promised. Merry Christmas!
Oh, it’s much worse than that. The lyrics also say, “We are rainbows, me and you, rvery color, every hue,” and if that isn’t a direct call out to CRT, I don’t know what is. They might as well have said slavery is bad or something else equally controversial to the snowflake replubican’ts.
Because of course – “In her lawsuit, Tempel says that although Sebert announced in August 2021 that the policy would equally ban signs, flags and materials promoting causes like Black Lives Matter and Blue Lives Matter, signs saying “Students for Life” and “Thin Blue Line” were permitted to be displayed in school common areas while Gay-Straight Alliance locker signs and signs stating, “this classroom is anti-racist” and “this school welcomes you” were prohibited.”
I was thinking of the photo of the Wisconsin HS students giving the Nazi salute in their class photo. The only one who wouldn’t was the gay gentleman in the top right corner, who was rightly disgusted.
The policy appears to originate with Neola, a company that provides school policy services to 317 clients in Wisconsin in addition to more than 1,000 others across six states, according to the company’s website. A call to Neola’s business office in Ohio could not immediately reach a spokesperson who could answer questions about the lawsuit and the policy on Tuesday.
In her lawsuit, Tempel says that although Sebert announced in August 2021 that the policy would equally ban signs, flags and materials promoting causes like Black Lives Matter and Blue Lives Matter, signs saying “Students for Life” and “Thin Blue Line” were permitted to be displayed in school common areas while Gay-Straight Alliance locker signs and signs stating, “this classroom is anti-racist” and “this school welcomes you” were prohibited.
In July 2021, the district also suspended diversity, equity and inclusion training for staff and suspended the work of its Equity Leadership Team, according to the complaint.
I was a regular babysitter in the 1970s for one family. They let their son watch TV, notably ‘The Electric Company” which, in my opinion, was so frenetic that the boy almost became agitated. The show that followed was Mr Rogers Neighborhood, which he loved – as did I watching for the first time as a teenager. One day while the show was on, his father came home from work to change clothes and go out on the bay. Walking by the TV set on his way to his room, the Dad muttered, “get that fag off the tv.’ Years later, I remember the Dad crying into my arms at the funeral home visitation after his son committed suicide by putting a rifle into his mouth in his bedroom.
I want to send this teacher some money for the fight.
Thanks again to Ten Bears for the link. This shows the claim they are against indoctrination in schools is not true, but instead the goal is to indoctrinate kids in a hard right wing fundamentalist Christian ideology. It is a return to the fake myth of the 1950s society and the removing of everything LGBTQIA and gender identity. Total authoritarian back to the dark ages regression. It is a rejection of all the social advancements of the modern age. Hugs. Scottie
One thing that is seldom mentioned about the removal of books from Florida classroom libraries: much of this activity may be illegal.
The school board in Escambia County, Florida, for example, is being sued over their decision to remove And Tango Makes Three and other books from public school libraries. And Tango Makes Three is the true story of two male penguins, Roy and Silo, who lived in the Central Park Zoo and raised an adopted chick. The woman who challenged the book, notorious Escambia County English Teacher Vicki Baggett, told Popular Information she was concerned it exposes students to “alternate sexual ideologies.” Baggett said “a second grader would read this book, and that idea would pop into the second grader’s mind… that these are two people of the same sex that love each other.” The school board appeared to have similar concerns. “The fascination is still on those two male penguins,” school board member David Williams said. “So I’ll be voting to remove the book from our libraries.”
Florida English teacher pushing book bans is openly racist and homophobic, students allege
In May, Penguin Random House, five authors, two parents, and the non-profit group PEN America sued the Escambia County school board in federal court, alleging that the school board’s actions violated the United States Constitution. The lawsuit alleges that the school board banned and restricted books “based on their disagreement with the ideas expressed in those books.” In so doing, the school board has “prescribed an orthodoxy of opinion that violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments.”
The lawsuit is ongoing, and Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody (R) has intervened in the case, arguing that it should be dismissed. In an extraordinary filing earlier this year, Moody argued that the First Amendment does not apply to public school libraries and that school boards can remove any book for any reason — even if the motive is discriminatory.
In Moody’s filing, Florida argues that the purpose of public school libraries is to “convey the government’s message,” and that can be accomplished through “the removal of speech that the government disapproves.” The issue of what books are allowed to be carried by school libraries, Florida states, should be settled at the “ballot box.” According to the state’s filing, public school libraries “are not a forum for free expression.”
Florida’s argument has serious flaws. Indeed, Florida’s filing acknowledges that no court has ruled, as Florida argues, that public school libraries are a form of government speech. The issues with Florida’s legal position were detailed in an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs filed by two dozen law professors.
Florida is arguing for an expansion of the definition of “government speech” to include public school libraries. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito — one of the court’s most conservative members — warned in the 1996 case of Matal v. Tam that the concept of “government speech” is “susceptible to dangerous misuse.” Alito, writing for the Supreme Court, wrote that “we must exercise great caution before extending our government-speech precedents” because it could be used as a pretext to “silence or muffle the expression of disfavored viewpoints.”
Currently, “the government speech doctrine only applies to state programs in which the government conveys an official message that the public would recognize as such.” Public school libraries do not exist “to carry official messaging” for the government, the law professors note. Therefore, “[a]pplying the government speech doctrine to school libraries would create a dangerous incompatibility with the nature and purpose of those libraries.”
A federal judge recently rejected a similar argument made by the Arkansas government regarding the removal of books from public libraries. “Defendants are unable to cite any legal precedent to suggest that the state may censor non-obscene materials in a public library because such censorship is a form of government speech,” the judge ruled.
The law professors highlight that there is a Supreme Court case that directly addresses the government’s role in curating school libraries, the 1982 case of Island Trees School District v. Pico. In Pico, the Supreme Court recognized that school boards have significant flexibility in determining the contents of school libraries. However, the Supreme Court was clear that the scope of the school board’s power over school libraries is limited by the First Amendment.
Citing previous Supreme Court decisions, the plurality opinion in Pico notes that “students must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate” and the “school library is the principal locus of such freedom.” As a result, it is unconstitutional for school boards to remove books from a school library in a “narrowly partisan or political manner.’” This appears to be exactly what is happening. And Tango Makes Three was removed from Escambia County school libraries because it didn’t conform to the school board’s political opinions about LGBTQ people.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit note that the precedent goes beyond Pico: “Every court that has addressed that issue… has rejected the position that libraries — including school libraries — constitute Constitution-free zones in which government officials can freely discriminate based on viewpoint.”
Florida realizes that Pico and related cases present a serious challenge to its position. In its filing in support of the Escambia County School Board, Florida argues that Pico should be ignored because it was a plurality decision. But the fact is that, in the 40 years after Pico was decided, the Supreme Court has never repudiated the case.
From “parental rights” to “authoritarianism”
The significance of Florida’s filing was recentlycovered in the Tallahassee Democrat, which interviewed several experts about the implications of the state’s arguments.
Ken Paulson, the director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University, noted that proponents of removing books from school libraries frequently say they are fighting for “parental rights.” But “[if] government speech determines what books can be in the library, the government is essentially saying your children can only see the ideas that the government has approved.” That is inconsistent, Paulson argues, with parental rights. “It’s authoritarianism,” Paulson said.
Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, said Florida’s position goes against the fundamental principle “that no government entity can engage in viewpoint discrimination.” Caldwell-Stone said, if Florida prevails, it would transform schools from a place dedicated to “preparing individuals… to make decisions about their own lives” to “indoctrination centers for only one viewpoint.”
Myriam and Cameron in NCLR’s “Healthcare is Caring” PSA.Photo: Screenshot
Scottie's Playtime 