Federal Appeals Court Upholds Arkansas Ban On Critical Race Theory In The Classroom
Just as ordinary citizens cannot require the government to express a certain viewpoint, students cannot oblige the government to maintain a particular curriculum
The state of Arkansas can prohibit the teaching of Critical Race Theory in the classroom, a federal appeals court has held, rejecting two students’ claims that the State’s ban violated their free speech rights.
We covered the students’ lawsuit last year here, where they joined with two teachers challenging the anti-indoctrination provision of Arkansas’s LEARNS Act (“Section 16”). In a preliminary ruling, the federal district court then blocked the State from taking action against the teachers for teaching Critical Race Theory (CRT) while the litigation played out.
Section 16 prohibits the promotion of “teaching that would indoctrinate students with ideologies such as Critical Race Theory … that conflict with the principle of equal protection under the law.”
The two teachers said they were self-censoring what and how they teach to avoid punishment under Section 16.
Based on that self-censorship, the students asserted their constitutional claim. The First Amendment protects their right to receive information, they argued, including information their teachers would otherwise be providing them.
In a unanimous ruling, the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit disagreed. Judge L. Steven Grasz, a Trump appointee, wrote the court’s decision vacating the district court’s preliminary injunction, concluding the students were unlikely to succeed on their free speech claim.
The classroom instruction the students claimed a “right to receive” constituted the government’s own speech, Judge Grasz wrote.
“That right cannot be used to require the government to provide a message it no longer is willing to say”:
Students do not possess a supercharged right to receive information in public schools. … Just as ordinary citizens cannot require the government to express a certain viewpoint or maintain a prior message, students cannot oblige the government to maintain a particular curriculum or offer certain materials in that curriculum based on the Free Speech Clause.
These principles hold true even where the teaching materials were removed for political reasons, the court continued. “Since the speech belongs to the government, it gets to control what it says.”
Put simply, the Constitution does not give the students the right to tell the school what to teach.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
so in otherwords
it will still be taught (b/c the adherents are still teaching) and when /if caught the parents will have to sue and children who are against racism will have to live under the constant fear of peer/teacher pressure to conform to their leftist ways
all this is predicated on the *fact*( as the left insists) that only whites can really be racists
so since that hasnt changed and is taught/implied
mob beat downs like in cincy will continue as a “they asked for it” agenda of the left
it alllll starts with education
HOW CAN PARENTS keep paying into these systems that tells their children you are inferior and deserve beat downs!!!?????
maga cannot just happen at the fed level
its a grassroots mission that is stalled by the continued assault against innocent children by the lefty agenda …that is not hyperbole thats what is happening and for the past 5+ decades
“HOW CAN PARENTS keep paying into these systems that tells their children you are inferior and deserve beat downs!!!?????”
Mostly because they have no choice. Or at least not an easy one. Property taxes are the primary funding for school systems. Don’t pay your property taxes and the government takes the property from you.
So you tell them to move. In theory that’s a good idea. In practice, not so much. Many people have invested a lot of time and money into their homes. They also have jobs that they may not be able to get somewhere else. So moving isn’t always a viable option either.
“maga cannot just happen at the fed level”
Agreed. But 1 person holding a gun in front of city hall / the state legislature is easily dealt with. 1,000+ is less so, but is also a lot harder to organize.
politicians change laws all the time mostly to supply the welfare state and its time for that to change
I dont tell anyone to move
I say change the lefty led narrative into a maga while we have the chance
by any means necessary works for the left so lets do it to and prove to the so called fiscal conservative gop that we want freedom from government except where they belong
military
courts
treasury
I didn’t mean that YOU, destroycommunism, tells them to move. I was referring to the person who’s response is always “move” or “get a different job”. Sorry for the confusion.
And for the record, I happen to agree with you. All I’m saying is that it’s not MY fault that I’m “paying into these systems” just because I have to pay my property taxes. I vote against crud like this, but if my 1 vote gets overridden by other voters…. Not much I can do about it except keep trying to educate people in my town/county/state. And not much chance of that since I’m either at work (law firm) or working my farm.
And no, I’m not moving either. 😐
good stuff
I moved. But about 15 years later than I should have. If I had been paying attention. Still worth the move.
The problem is no dissenting voices in the faculty. Otherwise CRT would be synthesized in something more mainstream, which it would also modify.
Picking out the truths and leaving the crap behind, in other words.
The part about authority coming from convention is okay but the lesson is be circumspect, not tear down convention.
No. The problem is education by government bureaucracy – America’s best example of totalitarian socialism.
“The two teachers said they were self-censoring what and how they teach to avoid punishment under Section 16.”
Yeah, right….
who does dictate what the schools teach?
the people of the state and then locals
so if the locals say they do want CRT but the state says no you cant teach that…….then the government is dictating what gets taught when in fact it should be the parents who dictate what gets taught
then what happens when there is a conflict within that local area on what gets taught…fighting
so TO AVOID THE FIGHTS
parents should pay teachers DIRECTLY and those teachers are ten bound by a written agreement on what gets taught…ITs A BUSINESS
violate that business…small claims court…and only that small population is affected NOT STATEWIDE x amount of innocent students
correction:
then bound
When I was teaching legal research and advanced legal research I self censored all the time. I did not talk about the Yankees roster or what pitcher they should trade for. I stuck to the topic at hand.
CRT is not a subject for grade school because all you are doing is indoctrinating students to hate their country, the Caucasian ethnicity, and Western Civilization.
I am puzzled. According to a 2023 ABC news report, “Academic experts, including [Professor of Law at UCLA & Columbia Law School and Executive Director of African American Policy Forum Kimberlé] Crenshaw, say critical race theory is not what is being taught in K-12 education curriculums.” https://abcnews.go.com/US/critical-race-theory-classroom-understanding-debate/story?id=77627465. But both sides of this lawsuit seem to think otherwise. Can ABC news be wrong?
They’re not teaching the theory in K-12. They’re teaching according to the theory. The theory itself is taught in teachers college, so the teachers know how to indoctrinate the kids.
“That right cannot be used to require the government to provide a message it no longer is willing to say”
Until the Democrats win some elections.
This is why government-run education is a mistake.
Sorry, for once you’ve got the wrong end of the stick. If Dems win elections then they are the government, and it wants to say what they want, so it says it. If a Dem-controlled city wants to paint a BLM or Pride message on its street it has every right to do so, and it is not required to put Pro-Life messages on its property, or to allow anyone else to do so.
This decision reaffirms exactly that principle. Governments, like anyone else, have the right to express their own opinions and to refuse to express contrary opinions. Your right to express your own opinion doesn’t entitle you to compel the government to express your opinion; nor does it entitle you to use the government’s resources to express your opinion.
Exactly so, Dem-controlled legislatures may require K-12 (but not university) teachers to teach their agenda, and Rep-controlled legislatures may ban them from doing so, or require them to teach a free market and anti-green agenda.
Huh? Do you disagree that “government-run education is a mistake”?