Mixed-race student brings lawsuit against charter school for mandatory CRT content.

[Metaphor]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/lawsuit-nevada-race-christianity-william-clark

A publicly funded charter school in Nevada created a hostile environment for students by instructing them to associate aspects of their identity with oppression, a new lawsuit alleges.

The suit was filed Tuesday by a high school senior at Democracy Prep at the Agassi campus in Las Vegas, who claims he was forced to take the course -- titled "Sociology of Change" -- in order to graduate.

William Clark, whose mother is Black and deceased father was White, claims he felt discriminated against and harassed by various aspects of the course -- including an alleged assertion that by not identifying with an oppressive group, students were exercising their privilege or underscoring their status as an oppressor.

The text of the filing is available here:
https://www.schoolhouserights.org/the-lawsuit.html

Plaintiff, William Clark, brings suit for injunctive relief and damages against Defendants for repeatedly compelling his speech involving intimate matters of race, gender, sexuality and religion. Defendants compelled Plaintiff William Clark to make professions about his racial, sexual, gender and religious identities in verbal class exercises and in graded, written homework assignments which were subject to the scrutiny, interrogation and derogatory labeling of students, teachers and school administrators. By directing Plaintiff William Clark to reveal his identities in a controlled, yet non-private setting, to scrutiny and official labeling, Defendants were and still are coercing him to accept and affirm politicized and discriminatory principles and statements that he cannot in conscience affirm. Defendants
“invade the sphere of intellect and spirit which it is the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from all official control.”
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
, 319 U.S. 624. Defendants repeatedly threatened William Clark with material harm including a failing grade and non-graduation if he failed to comply with their requirements. When he declined to participate in these confessional exercises and assignments, Defendants rejected his requests for reasonable accommodation and acted on their threats. Defendant
s’ coercive and intrusive behavior compelled William Clark’s protected speech and invaded his
privacy, violating his constitutional rights under the First Amendment and his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Commentary from the daily caller website:
https://dailycaller.com/2020/12/23/nevada-lawsuit-racist-charter-school/

A student from Democracy Preparatory Academy and his mother filed a federal lawsuit against the school and its administrators Tuesday, alleging compelled speech and racial discrimination.

The suit alleges that William Clark, a biracial twelfth-grader at Democracy Preparatory Academy, Agassi Campus, was required “to make professions about his racial, sexual, gender and religious identities… which were subject to the scrutiny, interrogation and derogatory labeling of students, teachers and school administrators,” according to court documents obtained by the Daily Caller. If Clark did not comply with these course requirements, he would not receive a passing grade.
The student’s African-American mother, Gabrielle Clark, who is a co-plaintiff, requested that her son be removed from the class “Sociology of Change,” a civics class in which he would learn about intersectionality theory. However, Democracy Prep principal Adam Johnson told Clark that the course was mandatory, so her son would be forced to take it.

 

[Trausti]

Do so hope that the pendulum starts to swing back from this lefty racist shit.

 

[zorq]

It kind of sounds like the school was trying to coerce him to talk about private aspects of himself without his consent by tying that to his grade. Privacy has been determined to be a 1st amendment right and a publicly funded school shouldn't be allowed to invade a student's privacy or penalize them for refusing to do so.

I think the kid has a case.

 

[ruby sparks]

I agree.

CRT is at least controversial, imo, but maybe there are moderate and extreme versions of it. I would certainly hope that there are more moderate versions of it than involved here, because to me this seems to have been attempted ideological indoctrination, involving an element of coercion.

 

[fromderinside]

If coercion at any level is established the school is up shitts creek.

Don't you just love it when Christians take over public schools so they can try to use state money to fuck with the state.

They shall all fall.

 

[TomC]

I dunno.

My schools had requirements I didn't like. Part of education is learning that sometimes you have to do things you really really don't want to do in order to achieve a goal.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

I dunno.

My schools had requirements I didn't like. Part of education is learning that sometimes you have to do things you really really don't want to do in order to achieve a goal.
Tom

Yeah, people have to deal with that in the workplace too. Every year, having to fill out the evaluation form. Where do you see yourself in five years? What are your goals for the upcoming year? 90 percent of the workers can't answer honestly because "Do my job, get my pay, go home at five." isn't a career enhancing statement.

 

[TomC]

I dunno.

My schools had requirements I didn't like. Part of education is learning that sometimes you have to do things you really really don't want to do in order to achieve a goal.
Tom

Yeah, people have to deal with that in the workplace too. Every year, having to fill out the evaluation form. Where do you see yourself in five years? What are your goals for the upcoming year? 90 percent of the workers can't answer honestly because "Do my job, get my pay, go home at five." isn't a career enhancing statement.

It's not just the work place. It's marriage. It's parenthood. It's practically every aspect of reality. It's life!

Learning to soldier through tough circumstances is a crucial part of becoming a competent adult. Learning to file lawsuits when you're unhappy is what produces Trumps.

Tom

 

[Politesse]

Learning to file lawsuits when you're unhappy is what produces Trumps.

Well, that's who's in charge of Amerian secondary ed right now, so...

It's funny how conservatives think the school system is super liberal because they hear wacko news stories about "extremist" teachers/professors or academic departments doing this and that. They never seem to notice that the reason they hear about it in the news is that said teachers, admins, professors and departments are being sued, fired, overtly illegalized, or otherwise formally persecuted by the instruments of state, which really aren't very liberal at all... It's not just Fox News watchers who spend their time and energy trying to think of new ways to denigrate and undermine the production of new knowledge, the administration of all these schools is totally on their side most of the time, especially if murdering the sciences saves money somehow.

It's funny, they claim to be defending "free speech" on campus, but here they're trying to make it illegal to so much as teach about critical race theory, let alone endorse it, even though that would be well within the traditional prerogative of a high school teacher anyway at least the way things used to be. Teachers aren't actually supposed to be compelled to endorse or not endorse any specific political position, and a high school senior should be challenged to occasionally consider political ideas other than those of their parents. The suit even noted the direct connection of this material to published, peer-reviewed research, so in theory it should be fair game just like any other scientific theory set that has met the same bar. Encountering new ideas, even ideas you are personally offended by, is part of being in high school. Or was. They're almost adults, and they should be treated like adults. But the Trump crowd wants even actual adults to act and be treated like children, so... I guess at least they're consistent.

 

[Metaphor]

I dunno.

My schools had requirements I didn't like. Part of education is learning that sometimes you have to do things you really really don't want to do in order to achieve a goal.
Tom

Yeah, people have to deal with that in the workplace too. Every year, having to fill out the evaluation form. Where do you see yourself in five years? What are your goals for the upcoming year? 90 percent of the workers can't answer honestly because "Do my job, get my pay, go home at five." isn't a career enhancing statement.

Oh, I see.

So, if your workplace sent you on compulsory courses saying that people from certain groups were inherently corrupt, that'd be a-okay with you?

 

[Metaphor]

It's funny, they claim to be defending "free speech" on campus, but here they're trying to make it illegal

No, they're not.

to so much as teach about critical race theory, let alone endorse it, even though that would be well within the traditional prerogative of a high school teacher anyway at least the way things used to be. Teachers aren't actually supposed to be compelled to endorse or not endorse any specific political position, and a high school senior should be challenged to occasionally consider political ideas other than those of their parents. The suit even noted the direct connection of this material to published, peer-reviewed research, so in theory it should be fair game just like any other scientific theory set that has met the same bar.

To imagine critical race theory is science is to imagine feminist theory is science. There's nothing 'scientific' about proclaiming that all white people are inherently racist.

 

[Politesse]

It's funny, they claim to be defending "free speech" on campus, but here they're trying to make it illegal

No, they're not.

to so much as teach about critical race theory, let alone endorse it, even though that would be well within the traditional prerogative of a high school teacher anyway at least the way things used to be. Teachers aren't actually supposed to be compelled to endorse or not endorse any specific political position, and a high school senior should be challenged to occasionally consider political ideas other than those of their parents. The suit even noted the direct connection of this material to published, peer-reviewed research, so in theory it should be fair game just like any other scientific theory set that has met the same bar.

To imagine critical race theory is science is to imagine feminist theory is science. There's nothing 'scientific' about proclaiming that all white people are inherently racist.

You obviously don't understand critical race theory or feminist theory if that is your summary of it. Taking a course on the subject would help, not hurt, this situation. Not understanding science is not the same thing as science itself being wrong.

 

[ZiprHead]

I dunno.

My schools had requirements I didn't like. Part of education is learning that sometimes you have to do things you really really don't want to do in order to achieve a goal.
Tom

Yeah, people have to deal with that in the workplace too. Every year, having to fill out the evaluation form. Where do you see yourself in five years? What are your goals for the upcoming year? 90 percent of the workers can't answer honestly because "Do my job, get my pay, go home at five." isn't a career enhancing statement.

Oh, I see.

So, if your workplace sent you on compulsory courses saying that people from certain groups were inherently corrupt, that'd be a-okay with you?

Classic strawman argument.

 

[Metaphor]

No, they're not.



To imagine critical race theory is science is to imagine feminist theory is science. There's nothing 'scientific' about proclaiming that all white people are inherently racist.

You obviously don't understand critical race theory or feminist theory if that is your summary of it. Taking a course on the subject would help, not hurt, this situation. Not understanding science is not the same thing as science itself being wrong.

If my work put me on such a course I would go to it and I would film it.

But I am certainly not going to a course voluntarily that calls me inherently broken because of my skin colour.

 

[Metaphor]

Oh, I see.

So, if your workplace sent you on compulsory courses saying that people from certain groups were inherently corrupt, that'd be a-okay with you?

Classic strawman argument.

Critical race theory proponents say all white people, and only white people, are racist. It isn't a straw man.

 

[Politesse]

No, they're not.



To imagine critical race theory is science is to imagine feminist theory is science. There's nothing 'scientific' about proclaiming that all white people are inherently racist.

You obviously don't understand critical race theory or feminist theory if that is your summary of it. Taking a course on the subject would help, not hurt, this situation. Not understanding science is not the same thing as science itself being wrong.

If my work put me on such a course I would go to it and I would film it.

But I am certainly not going to a course voluntarily that calls me inherently broken because of my skin colour.

Again, not even remotely connected to CRT. You aren't "inherently broken because of your skin color"; rather, because you were socialized into a culture in which skin color is used (somewhat arbitraily) as a class marker, your perceived skin color has had a measurable impact on your social life and position, whether or not you "meant" for this to be the case.

 

[Politesse]

Oh, I see.

So, if your workplace sent you on compulsory courses saying that people from certain groups were inherently corrupt, that'd be a-okay with you?

Classic strawman argument.

Critical race theory proponents say all white people, and only white people, are racist. It isn't a straw man.

What CRT observes is in a white-majority that the effect of white racism is very different from the effect of racism in the other direction, since there isn't an equivalent amount of insitutional inertia behind those two conditions.

 

[ZiprHead]

Do so hope that the pendulum starts to swing back from this lefty racist shit.

Why is it racist? Were the white kids excluded from the course?

 

[Metaphor]

If my work put me on such a course I would go to it and I would film it.

But I am certainly not going to a course voluntarily that calls me inherently broken because of my skin colour.

Again, not even remotely connected to CRT. You aren't "inherently broken because of your skin color"; rather, because you were socialized into a culture in which skin color is used (somewhat arbitraily) as a class marker, your perceived skin color has had a measurable impact on your social life and position, whether or not you "meant" for this to be the case.

No. CRT evangelists have specifically called out white people as inherently racist.

But, that isn't the point. Even if it is 'socialisation', they say that only white people, and all white people, are racist. That statement is what CRT proponents believe. It is not a straw man.

 

[Metaphor]

Critical race theory proponents say all white people, and only white people, are racist. It isn't a straw man.

What CRT observes is in a white-majority that the effect of white racism is very different from the effect of racism in the other direction, since there isn't an equivalent amount of insitutional inertia behind those two conditions.

Evidently you are not acquainted with CRT. They don't call prejudice against whites 'racism', nor is anything people of colour do to anyone else (including other people of colour) 'racism'. It could be bigotry and prejudice, but not racism.