Image 01 Image 03

Teachers in Minnesota Could Lose Licenses if They Don’t Affirm LGBT Identities

Teachers in Minnesota Could Lose Licenses if They Don’t Affirm LGBT Identities

“The standards appear to require teachers to adopt practices that could violate their constitutional rights.”

Tim Walz is still the governor of Minnesota. Thank your lucky stars he is not about to be sworn in as vice president.

The College Fix reports:

Minnesota may deny licenses if teachers don’t affirm LGBT identities

Current and aspiring teachers will need to ensure they are sufficiently in support of the LGBT agenda in order to have a license to teach in Minnesota under rules set to go into effect this July.

Minnesota’s new “Standards of Effective Practice” require teachers to “[foster] an environment that ensures student identities,” including “sexual orientation,” are “historically and socially contextualized, affirmed, and incorporated into a learning environment where students are empowered to learn and contribute as their whole selves.”

The standards, supported by the state’s Democrat Gov. Tim Walz, have drawn religious liberty concerns from a leading Supreme Court litigation group.

“In general, a state has the broad authority to determine curriculum for its public schools, and teachers typically cannot object to that curriculum,” Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Tyson Langhofer told The College Fix via a media statement. “This means that the state government can tell its public-school teachers to teach the theory of a certain ideology, political idea, or religion.”

Langhofer told The College Fix that the government cannot force teachers to agree with a certain belief or ideology through their speech or conduct.

“Minnesota’s new standards of effective practice for teachers appear to do just that. The standards don’t simply require teachers to teach a certain curriculum,” he said. “The standards appear to require teachers to adopt practices that could violate their constitutional rights.”

Langhofer said First Amendment protections could be used to push back against the standards.

“If teachers are forced to personally endorse ideas they disagree with or participate in teaching practices that violate their religious beliefs, they may be able to challenge these practices by arguing that their right to free exercise is being violated. It all depends on how these new standards are implemented,” he said.

His employer is no stranger to First Amendment and religious liberty lawsuits in the classroom. ADF has successfully defended a professor punished for refusing to use a student’s transgender pronouns, as previously reported by The Fix.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

That would be a religious test. BY DEFINITION.
And it needs to face a lawsuit immediately (not after some more visible harm is done) for “creating a hostile work environment.”

Sue the individuals involved until their wallets bleed.

    Milhouse in reply to GWB. | January 12, 2025 at 12:02 am

    No, it is not a religious test, because the teacher is free to believe whatever she likes, in her head. She is only required in the classroom to speak and behave in accord with the government policy. As the ADF itself admitted “This means that the state government can tell its public-school teachers to teach the theory of a certain ideology, political idea, or religion.” Well, not religion, since the state isn’t allowed to have one of those, but certainly the other things. And that is all that is being required.

It all depends on how these new standards are implemented,” he said.
No, actually, it doesn’t. Requiring people to use fantasy pronouns for people is, by definition, a religious requirement. The insanity that is transgenderism is a cult.

    True but maybe not a winning argument in court.

    Milhouse in reply to GWB. | January 12, 2025 at 12:07 am

    Requiring people to use fantasy pronouns for people is, by definition, a religious requirement.

    No, it is not. “Religion” has a legal definition and this is not it. And the teachers are not required to agree with the government policy, but only to teach as if they did. Which the government, as their employer, is entitled to require of them.

ahad haamoratsim | January 11, 2025 at 12:22 pm

So no licenses for Catholics? For Orthodox Jews? And no licensed teachers in their schools?

ahad haamoratsim | January 11, 2025 at 12:23 pm

I wonder how well that’s going to go over in the Somali community.

This seems like “compelled political speech,” just like “diversity statements.”

    Milhouse in reply to OldProf2. | January 12, 2025 at 12:04 am

    Not at all, because these are public school teachers, not university professors. The Supreme Court has held repeatedly that primary and secondary teachers are speaking for the school, not for themselves, and therefore have no freedom of speech when on duty. They have to express their employer’s views, not their own. When off duty they are free to express their own views.

Suppose the teacher / applicant is a math teacher. Is it his duty to “[foster] an environment that ensures student identities,” including “sexual orientation,” are “historically and socially contextualized, affirmed, and incorporated into a learning environment where students are empowered to learn and contribute as their whole selves.”

If an elementary school teacher was conducting a math class, it is a challenge to get the class to focus on the topic of the day rather than be distracted by comments on the identity of fellow students. What should the teacher do if he is accused of “whiteness” or if one student claims that the gay answer to the question is 2 + 2 = 5?