One-Sided “Free-Speech” at SBHS (Part II)
One-Sided “Free-Speech” at SBHS (Part II)
by Brian Campbell
Why is SBUSD violating the CA Education Code and the First Amendment?
Recently, a student from SBHS posted an article on SB Current after trying multiple times over the last few months to express his First Amendment rights as numerous other students are allowed to do on campus and in the school paper.
His repeated attempts have been blocked by the administrators at SBHS and SBUSD.
This student requested months ago for permission to display Israeli flags on school grounds in conjunction with an Op-Ed reporting on the violent attack of Israel’s civilians on October 7. The neighboring country’s military group – Hamas, a terrorist organization – invaded a U.S. ally and proceeded to rape and murder unarmed civilians and take some 200 hostages from children to adults.
CA Ed Code 48907. (a) Pupils of the public schools shall have the right to exercise freedom of speech and of the press …
CA Ed Code 48907 states, “prohibited shall be material that incites … substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school.”
The Vice Principal stated in an email that displaying the flags might be “potentially disruptive.” She did not state or prove that displaying flags for a U.S. ally has or would cause substantial disruption. She also refused to provide an explanation to the student. CA Education Code 48907. School officials have the burden of showing justification without undue delay prior to a limitation of pupil expression.
Meanwhile, SBUSD allows articles and expressions to be printed and posted criticizing the national anthem, in favor of gun control, impeaching Trump, stating that “If Trump were elected minority groups would lose their rights,” calling Trump a “tyrant”, stating that the Pledge of Allegiance is divisive, handing out Black Lives Mater (BLM) reading and reference materials, etc.…
Just last week the school paper published a one-sided article titled, “Israel – Palestine Conflict: a History“
Is it substantially disruptive when hundreds of students walk out of school at noon on a Wednesday? In November 2016, hundreds of SBHS students walked out to protest Donald Trump being elected President.
Are they election deniers?
That’s not allowed, is it?
School Officials “Know” They’re Right
More importantly, despite the substantial disruption, the District and schools later allowed multiple articles to be written bashing President Trump.
According to the SMHS Editor-in-Chief, 30% of Santa Barbara voted for Trump, meaning a large part of the population would probably be offended by the writings in the school papers. Apparently, the school is purposefully trying to create disruptions with the full approval of the District.
As you walk through the halls of Santa Barbara schools you will see examples of other expressions of speech such as BLM fists stating, “The time is now, imagine another world and fight for it.” You see Pride flags and Transgender stickers stating “Transphobia is Cringe” etc.…
All these articles and expressions of “free” speech are allowed despite the controversial nature of each of the mentioned topics.
BLM is known for violence and deaths at their protests; BLM leaders have been accused of using donated monies for their personal gain and buying multi-million-dollar homes.
Disruption for Us but not for You
Per the National Institutes of Health (NIH), “Gender issues have become a polarized and political subject,” that there are “ethical and legal dilemmas facing children with gender dysphoria, their families and the clinical teams caring for them.”
Both examples are potentially disruptive, and the national groups have in fact caused disruptions throughout America.
Is the District not concerned about the same types of disruptions occurring here?
Why does Santa Barbara refuse to allow this student’s expression supporting an American ally, supporting people currently being persecuted across the country? The student has spoken directly to the Vice Principal, Principal, and Assistant Superintendent. In response to the student’s repeated requests and an Op-Ed describing his personal experience and firsthand conversations with the school’s principal, the District sent a threatening attorney letter directly to the minor to persuade him to not to continue defending his Constitutional rights.
At no time did the principal or any other adult reach out to the student’s parents and call for a meeting to discuss the issue. They went right to an attorney and directly threatened a student, a child.
It appears these tyrants are educating your children according to the party line.
Some might call this bullying into submission.
At the parents’ request, they met directly with the principal and assistant superintendent who continued to stall and ignore the requests to protect the First Amendment and give equal representation. When asked why the school and district allow expressions like the closed fist with a call to action, both the principal and assistant superintendent stated they had no idea what group the fist stood for. The principal stated too that he had no idea what group posted the BLM fists, the Pride flags, or the Transphobia is Cringe posters, on campus.
From their admission they appear to let anyone – including unknown parties – post various expressions of support for various causes and movements, but they refuse to allow this student to post his support of the Jewish community.
Why does SBUSD prohibit certain expressions and speech?
The short answer is that it does not fit with propaganda promulgated by the dominant political party, which in Santa Barbara is the Democrat Party.
Coincidentally, all Santa Barbara’s schools are run by Democrat-endorsed individuals.
This agenda starts right here in our public schools and this current issue of freedom of speech is a prime example of how they are influencing and denying children whose opinions may differ from theirs the ability to voice those opposing viewpoints.
Please email the Principal, Assistant Superintendent, and School Board and tell them you support all first amendment rights and ask them why they do not.
•••
Wendy Sims-Moten School Board wsims-moten@sbunified.org
Gabe Escobedo School Board gescobedo@sbunified.org
William Banning School Board wbanning@sbunified.org
Rose Munoz School Board rmunoz@sbunified.org
Sunita Beall School Board sbeall@sbunified.org
Anastasia Li Student School Board studentboardmember@sbunified.org
Hilda Maldonado Superintendent hmaldonado@sbunified.org
Assistant Superintendent Dr Lyn Sheffield lsheffield@sbunified.org
Principal Razo Frazo@sbunified.org
Vice Principal Natalie Spevak nspevak@sbunified.org
I fully support walkouts, in fact, here is how much I support them: I think all the parents who have not been indoctrinated by Leftist ideology should (using their parental powers of persuasion--and hopefully who have not lost their children to the brainwashing of the schools) encourage their kids to walkout of the public schools--permanently. That's right, using another Leftist talking point I support "De-fund"--as in this case--the public schools. Yes, no students filling up the chairs means the funds dry up and those wonderful (sarcasm) teachers and administrators suddenly suffer a public relations nightmare. Then, the parents can toss them a bone: stop with the indoctrination, then START to actually teach kids to read, write, and most importantly--HOW to think, not just to regurgitate guilt trip and sexual grooming these fine upstanding pillars of the community (more sarcasm) have been pumping into their brains for decades.
When the teachers/paper-pushers see their food bowls shrinking let's see if they are still willing to support this totalitarian programming cloaked as "tolerance".
I read this good article by Mr. Campbell, desribing in SB some of the beginning
events in Nazi Germany in the 1930's and I quote "Why does Santa Barbara refuse to allow this student’s expression supporting an American ally, supporting people currently being persecuted across the country? The student has spoken directly to the Vice Principal, Principal, and Assistant Superintendent. In response to the student’s repeated requests and an Op-Ed describing his personal experience and firsthand conversations with the school’s principal, the District sent a threatening attorney letter directly to the minor to persuade him to not to continue defending his Constitutional rights.
The Student was lucky he was not arrested that is how the Nazis dealt with those that spoke out against pure evil in Germany. Welcome to Santa Barbara home of the free............. so you all thought.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
—Martin Niemöller
There is Nothing New Under the Sun .......... Ecclesiastes 1:9
Howard Walther, member of a Military Family