For a few months, parents have been organizing in Hollis-Brookline because they do not want their kids to be shamed or taught to become racists. The residents recently held a community meeting where this subject was brought forward based on the commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
There was even a zoom meeting put on by some moms telling everyone how wonderful it will be once they implement DEI into the class curriculum. It actually didn’t sound bad. After all, the words diversity, equity, and inclusion sound good. Essentially they were telling parents to calm down; it will all be alright. Based on what they presented, I thought they might be right.
But then a parent posts this on their community Facebook page:
Dear teacher and the Hollis-Brookline community, I hope you have deep pockets because if your parents decide to sue you, you will have to pay.
This was a flyer that was sent to the people who live in this community. I suspect an angry parent who didn’t want to be labeled as a racist decided to expose this via snail mail.
Maybe he/she doesn’t know that if the district engages in this practice, they could be violating the students’ civil rights.
The Attorney General in the State of Montana recently laid out a civil rights lawsuit that a parent can file if they live there, and this kind of teaching takes place in a classroom. That can be translated into a lawsuit in New Hampshire. In fact, there is already one in process in another town.
I would suggest that if parents want to fight back, it’s time to lawyer up. Here is some information for your lawyer as laid out for you by the Attorney General in Montana: “The task was to determine Whether the teaching of Critical Race Theory or so-called “antiracism” in Montana schools violates the U.S. Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Article II, Section 4 of the Montana Constitution, or the Montana Human Rights Act.”
He goes on to say,
The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that no State shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 1.1 The “central purpose” of the Equal Protection Clause “is to prevent the States from purposefully discriminating between individuals on the basis of race.”
Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630, 642 (1993). “Purchased at the price of immeasurable human suffering, the equal protection principle reflects our Nation’s understanding that [racial] classifications ultimately have a destructive impact on the individual and our society.” Adarand, 515 U.S. at 240 (Thomas, J., concurring). As a result, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence recognizes that “[c]lassifications of citizens solely on the basis of race ‘are by their very nature odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality.’” Shaw, 509 U.S. at 643 (quoting Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81, 100 (1943)); Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 518 (1989) (Kennedy, J., concurring) (“The moral imperative of racial neutrality is the driving force of the Equal Protection Clause.”). Therefore, “the Equal Protection Clause demands that racial classifications … be subjected to the ‘most rigid scrutiny.’” Fisher v. Univ. of Tex., 570 U.S. 297, 310 (2013) (Fisher I) (quoting Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 11 (1967)).
Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects all students who attend institutions receiving federal funding from being treated differently based on their actual or perceived race, color, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. § 2000d (“No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”). Title VI bans all discrimination that would violate the Equal Protection Clause. See Gratz, 539 U.S. at 276 n.23.
And in my opinion, the NH Constitution, Article 1. [Equality of Men; Origin and Object of Government.]. All men are born equally free and independent; Therefore, all government of right originates from the people, is founded in consent, and instituted for the general good.
June 2, 1784*
It is pretty clear to me that the teacher in Exeter, NH, who violated a student’s free speech rights, lacked the training to understand the civil rights of his students.
Civil rights apply to ALL of us, black, white, brown, etc. You don’t get to violate our rights because you have some vendetta or self-hatred.
I had a school board member tell me years ago; nothing will change until parents start suing their schools.
The parents whose son was told to remove the Thin Blue Line flag while other students paraded around with their chosen flag will be holding the school district accountable. They lawyered up.
A district administrator that puts your hard-earned tax dollars at risk of a lawsuit not only disregards our civil rights, but it’s also fiscally irresponsible.
I would encourage everyone who sees this in their classroom or school district to find a good attorney. You may have a payday coming your way.