Friday, December 23, 2022

Woke University Walks Back Proposal to Censor 'Harmful Language' - It Only Took 48 Hours After People Noticed

An elite university is seemingly walking back a rigid campus language code two days after it was rolled out to widespread criticism.

Stanford University appeared to have removed mention of its “Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative” from its website as of Monday, according to The Washington Free Beacon. The initiative was a product of the university’s IT department.

The webpage for the initiative went live over the weekend, the Free Beacon reported. The proposed language policies were the subject of a critical Op-Ed published by The Wall Street Journal on Monday.

The university resource outlined a laundry list of “harmful” words and phrases that would be removed from Stanford websites and suggested politically correct alternatives to the objectionable language.

Words like “freshman” and “mankind” were singled out for being “gender-based.” Terms such as “blind study” and “tone-deaf” were criticized as “ableist.”

Even the word “American” was designated as “harmful” on the grounds that it supposedly ascribes supremacy to the U.S. over other countries in the Americas.

A professor at Stanford’s medical school publicly rejected the proposed elimination of the word “American.”

“I remember how proud I was when I became a naturalized American citizen,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya tweeted. “I’m still proud to be an American, and I don’t care that [Stanford] disapproves of my using the term.”

Steve Gallagher, Stanford’s chief information officer, released a statement on Tuesday distancing the school from the censorious initiative.

“Over the last couple of days, there has been much discussion of a website that provides advice for the IT community at Stanford about word choices in Stanford websites and code,” Gallagher said.

“First and importantly, the website does not represent university policy. It also does not represent mandates or requirements,” he clarified.

Gallagher said the word “American” would not be banned by the university.

“We have particularly heard concerns about the guide’s treatment of the term ‘American,'” Gallagher said. “We understand and appreciate those concerns. To be very clear, not only is the use of the term ‘American’ not banned at Stanford, it is absolutely welcomed.”

Gallagher indicated that the speech code was undergoing “continual review,” suggesting that it could return in an altered capacity.


Elementary School Counselor Gets 25 Years in Prison for Exploiting Underage Girls Through Snapchat

A former elementary school counselor in West Virginia will go to prison for 25 years for reportedly exploiting underage girls on the photo-sharing app Snapchat.

Todd Roatsey, 43, who was a counselor at Pinch Elementary School in Pinch, West Virginia, used Snapchat to connect with minors while posing as an 18-year-old boy, according to the New York Post:

At the start of January 2020, Roatsey messaged one girl he thought was 16 and another girl he believed was also a minor while pretending to be 18 years old on Snapchat, prosecutors said. He admitted that he convinced both girls to record themselves by making sexually explicit videos that show the girls masturbating, prosecutors said.

He also admitted that he sent videos back where he was masturbating.

He then used his Snapchat account to message several other girls he knew from Pinch Elementary that included more than 100 videos he recorded while communicating with two of the girls, who were both around 12 years old, the feds said. One of the victims was a student at Pinch Elementary at the time, prosecutors said.

He received numerous videos of the girls performing what he called “sexy” dances or gymnastic poses like full backbends, according to prosecutors. The girls only wore the athletic bras and shorts on video while Roatsey admitted to telling the girls they were “hot” and “sexy.”

Prosecutors reportedly said that Roatsey confessed to distributing, receiving and owning child pornography, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia. He pleaded guilty to child exploitation crimes this year.

Roatsey attempted to cover up his crimes by deleting his Snapchat account shortly after DHS agents searched his home in Oct. 2021 and seized electronic devices in his home with child porn on them.

Roatsey will have a lifetime of supervised release when he gets out of prison in 25 years. He will be required to be registered as a sex offender and pay victims $23,000 in restitution, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

“As an elementary school counselor, Roatsey intentionally placed himself in a position of trust over the kinds of children to whom he was sexually attracted,” U.S. Attorney Will Thompson said in a statement, adding that the former school counselor’s actions were “horrific.”

“In our communities, schools are the only constant for a lot of children. A lot of the time, school is the safe place. The fact that Mr. Roatsey made this not a safe place was, I find, to be very horrific,” he explained.

Last week, Townhall covered how a high school basketball coach and school monitor in Martin County, Florida, was arrested for allegedly paying underage girls to send him nude photos on Snapchat. The Martin County Sheriff’s Office reportedly got an anonymous tip about the coach, 28-year-old Alton Edwards, and spoke with seven teenagers who claim they sent him explicit photos.

"Our theory is that he probably [took a] screenshot, saved some of those pictures, and that when we serve the search warrant, we will find them on his camera," Sheriff William Snyder told reporters, adding that it appeared to be a “known secret” among students for years that , but no one spoke up.

If your children have Snapchat, go home tonight and delete it,” the sheriff said.


What Education Issues Did Voters Care About Most?

Critical race theory, LGBTQ issues, and “political indoctrination”—hot topics in the national media over the past year—did not rank as the most pressing issues for voters in the 2022 midterm elections, a new poll suggests.

But the political divide over those issues remains significant. More than 40 percent of voters still labeled fears of indoctrination, critical race theory, and LGBTQ agendas as a major factor in their election decisions, according to results from the poll.

The National Education Association surveyed 1,200 midterm voters—including an even share of Republicans, Democrats, and independents, from Nov. 10 through Nov. 19—about the education issues that were most important to them.

Forty-three percent of respondents identified the statement that “too many schools are teaching critical race theory to be politically correct” as a major factor in their voting decisions, while 42 percent identified “students are being indoctrinated by radical left-wing teachers” and “teachers are grooming students and pushing the radical LGBTQ agenda” as major factors.

Those concerns, however, did not rank in the top five of major issues for voters. The most pressing issue was school shootings, with 60 percent of voters identifying it as a major factor. Fifty-five percent of voters identified students not receiving “a complete, honest history of our country, including on topics like slavery, the civil rights movement, and Native American history” as a major factor in their vote. And 55 percent of voters also said concerns about school funding and book bans were major factors in their votes.

The NEA is the largest national teachers’ union and overwhelmingly supports Democratic political candidates and issues. The union views the poll results as an indication that issues like school safety and funding are more important to voters than issues promoted in the campaigns of politically conservative candidates.

“We ended up seeing that voters voted for candidates and for issues that … supported strong schools, that supported working families, that wanted people to support our students, their children,” NEA President Becky Pringle said in an interview. “I’m not surprised that’s what ended up happening.”

But education advocates who are politically conservative also see the results as an indication that their issues are resonating with voters.

In both statewide and local elections, people who were worried about critical race theory were not significantly more motivated to vote than those who were not afraid of it.

Sixty-two percent of people who identified themselves as having an “unfavorable” view of critical race theory said they were more motivated or enthusiastic to vote in the midterms. On the other hand, 60 percent of people who identified themselves as having a favorable view of critical race theory also said they were more motivated or enthusiastic about voting in this election.

The numbers showed similar trends in school board elections. In total, 40 percent of respondents said that school board elections were more important this year than in past years. Seventy-eight percent of the respondents in total voted in school board elections.

Of those in favor of critical race theory, 33 percent said school board elections were more important than in past years and 80 percent actually voted in the school board elections. At the same time, 48 percent of people who were worried about critical race theory said the school board elections were more important than in past years, and 79 percent actually voted for school board members.

Pringle views the poll results as a clear signal that voters rejected the idea that critical race theory was a reason why people would vote for more politically conservative candidates.

“It went to that place of, ‘that’s not what we want,’” she said. “We want our kids to learn about each other and to know each other so they can grow and learn and be in a cooperative space with each other.”

But some education advocates disagree.

Lindsey Burke, director of the center for education policy at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy think tank, said the results show that “the values schools are disseminating to students matter greatly to parents, and that a perceived misalignment in those values continues to motivate many parents at the ballot box.”

"[Policymakers] should work at every turn to empower families with transparency around what is being taught in public schools,” Burke said in a statement.

The poll results are in line with what the NEA saw in its own campaign efforts during the midterms.

Seventy-one percent of the thousands of candidates endorsed by NEA and its affiliates, who are often liberal-leaning, won their elections. Conservative-leaning organizations, like the 1776 Project and Moms for Liberty, didn’t see the same levels of success, with only about a third of the school board candidates endorsed by the 1776 Project and half for Moms For Liberty winning their elections.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents to the NEA poll said they support public schools in their community and 65 percent said they support local teachers. The results come at a time when education advocates have expressed concerns that politics are driving a wedge between educators and their communities.

The support for teachers is especially high among parents and Democrats. Seventy-one percent of parents said they view local teachers favorably and 84 percent of Democrats said the same. Sixty-one percent of independents and 48 percent of Republicans said they view teachers favorably.

At the same time, most of the respondents—62 percent—view themselves on the same side as teachers when it comes to making decisions about local schools and education policy. Eighty-five percent of those who voted for Democrats said they are on the same side as what most teachers want while 40 percent of those who voted Republican said the same.

“It showed us that parents and educators are united in wanting to see every student succeed,” Pringle said. “They understand it’s not only about their child, it’s about all children.”

The poll showed that politicians should listen to educators, parents, and education experts if they want to win over voters, Pringle said.

“If you listen to the people who are impacted by the policies and those who have dedicated their lives to educating America’s students, then you not only will develop good policy and a vision for what public education can and should be, but people will hear it and they’ll vote for you,” she said.




Thursday, December 22, 2022

Indiana School Board, Superintendent Refuse to Explain Secret Transgender Policy to Parents

The school board and superintendent of an Indiana school district refused to comment Monday on a recently uncovered transgender policy for students that keeps parents in the dark, nearly two weeks after a public meeting at which parents demanded that officials explain why they’re hiding information.

Concerned parents in Pendleton, Indiana, flocked to the Dec. 8 school board meeting three days after The Daily Signal exposed the school district’s secret policy and a so-called Gender Support Plan for transitioning students.

School Board President Joel Sandefur, other school board members, Schools Superintendent Mark Hall, and one of his assistants all refused to respond to The Daily Signal’s latest request for answers to five key questions about the secret policy before Monday’s publication deadline. Those questions are specified below.

“You should be ashamed,” one mother told Hall and the school board at the Dec. 8 meeting. “I trusted you with my children and you lied to me—to us.”

Dozens of parents and other area residents packed the meeting room to obtain information directly from the elected board and Hall, the appointed superintendent of the Pendleton-based school district, known as the South Madison Community School Corporation.

They soon were disappointed, as Sandefur and Hall evaded questions and blamed the district’s secret transgender policy on unrelated federal law and regulations.

Because of illness, this columnist was unable to follow up my Dec. 5 expose in The Daily Signal by attending and reporting immediately on what happened three days later at the school board meeting. Now I am.

The board’s meeting, livestreamed on YouTube, quickly progressed through typical meeting minutes and updates.

Then, after a short break, Hall read a prepared statement. In it, the superintendent claimed that because the South Madison school district accepts federal funding, the district is required to follow a nondiscrimination policy, which appears as a “Non-Discrimination Statement” on its website. That statement refers to federal nondiscrimination law as well as, incongruously, Department of Agriculture regulations.

South Madison, the superintendent of schools intoned, would not discriminate based on sex, color, age, national origin, gender identity, etc.

To comply with that law and those rules, Hall said, the school system must treat all students equally with regard to “preferred names,” equating a student’s asking to be called by a shortened name or nickname to a student’s changing names and personal pronouns as a result of a gender transition.

The superintendent didn’t connect this explanation to parents’ deep concern about the school district’s withholding information from parents in any way. Hall also offered no explanation as to why a blank form used by the district for transitioning students, called the Gender Support Plan, isn’t accessible online.

Before I go into more detail, some background:

The Daily Signal reported Dec. 5 that the South Madison school district had implemented the secret transgender policy and Gender Support Plan.

Under the policy, the superintendent’s office orders counselors and teachers to refrain from mentioning a “transitioning” student’s new personal pronouns or name to his parents—much less check that parents are even aware that their child believes he or she is transgender.

School counselor Kathy McCord went on the record with The Daily Signal to outline the shady methods the school district employed to keep the so-called Gender Support Plan away from teachers and parents. McCord also described how she was ordered to compel speech from teachers by requiring them to use one set of names and pronouns with students and another with parents.

The Daily Signal reported that McCord and another counselor, who chose to remain anonymous, expressed distress at the district policy. They said that they became school counselors to work with students and parents, not to come between them.

McCord told The Daily Signal that Assistant Superintendent Andrew Kruer, Hall’s subordinate, had informed all counselors that this procedure of keeping information from parents was a school board-approved policy. Kruer also told counselors that the district’s legal counsel, LGBTQ+ advocate Jessica Heiser, had informed the counseling staff it was federal law.

Amanda Keegan, a geography and psychology teacher at the district’s Pendleton Heights High School, told The Daily Signal that the secret transgender policy was one reason she resigned. Keegan said it made her physically ill to lie to parents’ faces about their children.

“When I had to look at that parent, and feel like I was lying to that parent … I was sick to my stomach,” she said. “I can’t lie to parents. I can’t do that again.”

Before publishing its initial report, The Daily Signal sought comment from Hall, Kruer, and Sandefur, the school board president. All three flatly refused to provide comments or explanations about South Madison’s student gender policies.

One school board member, Kaye Wolverton, said that she was unaware of any Gender Support Plan or policy to keep information from parents—but that she never would have approved either.

At one point during his prepared statement to parents, Hall, appointed by the board in 2020, said the district didn’t ask or allow counselors or teachers to diagnose or treat gender dysphoria, which conflicts with expectations set forth for counseling staff in the district’s Gender Support Plan as well as the information provided by McCord.


The Transgender Trajectory

The children had gathered that day for the first time in their first-grade classroom. At the top of the agenda: learn how to do simple problems in addition and subtraction.

After the teacher had reviewed some basic principles of arithmetic, she asked one of the students: "Do you know what one plus one equals?"

The little girl responded: "Two."

The teacher then admonished her: "No, it equals three."

The girl was astonished, but the teacher was adamant. "One plus one equals three," the teacher insisted.

But the little girl was very bright. She held up her right hand where the teacher could see it. "Teacher," she said, grabbing her index finger, "that is one."

Then the girl reached over and grabbed the next finger. "That is another one," she told the teacher. "So now I am holding two."

"I told you and you need to listen," the teacher admonished the little girl. "The fact of the matter is that one plus one equals three -- and you need to accept that."

The little girl looked at the teacher in astonishment and disbelief.

"One plus one equals three," the teacher repeated. "That is the official policy of this school district."

This may not have started happening yet in America's first-grade classrooms, but a similar phenomenon is already taking place in high school athletic competitions.

In 2013, the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference adopted what is referred to as its "Revised Transgender Participation Policy."

This "policy," it says, "addresses eligibility determinations for students who have a gender identity that is different from the gender listed on their birth certificates."

"Therefore, for purposes of sports participation, the CIAC shall defer to the determination of the student and his or her local school regarding gender identification," it continues. "In this regard, the school district shall determine a student's eligibility to participate in CIAC gender specific sports team(s) based on the gender identification of that student in current school records and daily life activities in the school and community at the time that sports eligibility is determined for a particular season.

"Accordingly, when a school district submits a roster to the CIAC, it is verifying that it has determined that the students listed on a gender specific sports team are entitled to participate on that team due to their gender identity," says the policy.

In plain English: A boy who "identifies" as a girl is "entitled" to compete against girls on the girls' "gender specific sports team."

Yes, in Connecticut high school sports, one plus one equals three. Or a boy is a girl if he says he is.

How has this impacted girls' sports in Connecticut?

The case of Soule v. Connecticut Association of Schools is now working its way up through the federal courts. The plaintiffs are four biological females who were high school track-and-field athletes.

The Alliance Defending Freedom, which is advancing the female athletes' case, filed a brief last year in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that summarized the basic facts behind it.

"Biological males, if allowed to compete, will dominate women's sports," said the ADF brief. "That is exactly what happened in Connecticut's high school track and field."

In 2017, said the ADF brief, "a biological male athlete who identified as female started running in women's track and field."

In 2018, the ADF noted, "another biological male athlete who identified as female, switched from competing in boys' track to girls' track events."

The result? Over the course of two years, the ADF informed the court, "two biologically male athletes, won 13 girls' state-championship titles and occupied more than 68 opportunities to advance to and participate in exclusive higher-level competitions -- opportunities that would otherwise have gone to females."

These two biologically male athletes, ADF told the court, "won 13 out of 14 'girls' championships, leaving a female runner to win just one. (Needless to say, in the boys division, males won all 14 parallel 'boys' championships.)"

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its opinion in this case last week, dismissing the case brought by the biologically female athletes.

"Plaintiffs allege that the Policy violates Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 ... because the participation of transgender females in girls' high school athletic events results in 'students who are born female' having materially fewer opportunities for victory, public recognition, athletic scholarships, and future employment 'than students who are born male,'" the court summarized in its opinion.

"To remedy the alleged Title IX violations," the court said, "Plaintiffs requested damages and two injunctions -- one to enjoin future enforcement of the Policy and one to alter the records of certain prior CIAC-sponsored girls' track events to remove the records achieved by two transgender girls, who intervened in this action."

The court's opinion meticulously refers to two types of "girls." One it calls "transgender girls" or "girls who are transgender." The other it calls "cisgender girls" or "girls who are cisgender."

In other words, in this court's arithmetic, two distinct sexes equal one.

Noting that the biological females who brought this case did sometimes defeat the "transgender girls" they were forced to compete against, the court concluded: "Plaintiffs' theory of injury in fact -- that the Policy deprived them of a 'chance to be champions' -- fails because they have not alleged a cognizable deprivation here."

The trajectory of the transgender movement is driving America away from a society based on objective truth -- where a boy is a boy, for example -- toward a society where what we pretend is true depends on what those in authority demand.


Biden Administration Investigates Texas Schools for Removal of sexually deviant books

The Department of Education is launching a civil rights investigation into a Texas school district for the removal of books with sexually explicit content from school libraries.

The Office of Civil Rights’ investigation of the Granbury Independent School District, which educates just fewer than 7,000 students about 40 miles west of Fort Worth, comes in response to a complaint by the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas.

The ACLU of Texas argues the removal of the books constitutes a Title IX violation on “the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation” because all target books were “related to LGBTQ+ inclusion.”

The Texas Tribune calls the investigation the “first-of-its-kind” that explicitly centers a civil right investigation around the removal of books from a library, since liberal literature and curricula in schools have galvanized activists across the country to protest the “gender ideology” and “critical race theory” being taught.

In January, the district’s superintendent, Jeremy Glenn, instructed librarians to remove books dealing with “transgender, LGBTQ, and sex [and] sexuality,” according to an audio recording that was leaked in March to NBC News, ProPublica, and the Texas Tribune.

Citing parental concerns, Mr. Glenn asked for the removal of more than 100 books in the school library — including “This Book Is Gay,” a resource book for teenagers on coming out that has become a focus of parental rights activists across the country. The book contains chapters titled, “Where to Meet People Like You,” which advises readers on how to use gay dating apps such as Grinder, and, “The Ins and Outs of Gay Sex,” which instructs readers on sexual acts.

“I don’t want a kid picking up a book — whether it’s about homosexuality or heterosexuality — and reading about how to hook up sexually in our libraries,” Mr. Glenn told the librarians, before affirming that “there are two genders.”

“Granbury is a very, very conservative community,” Mr. Glenn told librarians, stopping short of accusing them of subverting communal norms. “If it is not what you believe, you better hide it. Because it ain’t changing in Granbury.”

The ACLU’s complaint accused Mr. Glenn of creating “a chilling atmosphere” for gay and transgender students.

“The atmosphere created by Superintendent Glenn’s comments and by the book removals remains — a school environment that is pervasively hostile to LGBTQ+ and especially transgender and non-binary students,” the organization wrote in its complaint, filed in July.

More than 100 books were temporarily removed from the shelves, but most of them returned after a volunteer committee reviewed the content — including “Being Jazz: My Life as a Transgender Teen” and “Safe Sex 101: An Overview for Teens.” Meanwhile, “This Book Is Gay” and several other titles remain out of the school libraries.

The intervention by the Biden administration in the policy disagreement between school librarians and parents is illustrative of the growing tension between conservative parents and liberal educators — fueled by Covid school closures and ideologically driven lessons on race and gender.

While Granbury is a city, a recent study by Jay Greene of the Heritage Foundation and Ian Kingsbury of the Educational Freedom Institute found stark differences in political values between teachers and other residents in rural Texas counties.

In the most recent gubernatorial election, more than 90 percent of campaign donations from public school employees in rural areas went to Democratic candidates. Governor Abbott, a Republican, cruised to victory in the same areas, winning more than 80 percent of the vote.

Two rising Republican stars, Governors Glenn Youngkin of Virginia and Ron DeSantis of Florida, have both hitched their wagons to the movement of parents asking for more oversight of their children’s education.

Political analysts attributed Mr. Youngkin’s 2021 electoral victory to the mutual support between the candidate and parent activists. Mr. Youngkin campaigned on promises to involve parents in their children’s classrooms and to “ban critical race theory on day one.”

His Democratic opponent, Governor McAuliffe, was criticized for his support of teachers unions and opposition to parental involvement in curricula. “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach,” he said during one debate.

In a statement, the ACLU of Texas praised the Department of Education for looking into the possible Title IX violation.

“By choosing to open this investigation in response to our complaint, the federal government is signaling that remedying discrimination against LGBTQIA+ students is a top priority and that school districts cannot deny students the right to be themselves in school, be it through book bans, discriminatory comments, or other harmful policies,” the group said. ?




Wednesday, December 21, 2022

University of Oklahoma bans TikTok after Gov. Stitt's executive order cites 'national security concerns'

The University of Oklahoma will be banning the use of the social media app TikTok for students and staff, according to an email sent out to students on Tuesday.

In an email, the school said it would be barring internet access for the app in lieu of Governor Kevin Stitt’s executive order banning TikTok on state devices.

"In compliance with the Governor’s Executive Order 2022-33, effective immediately, no University employee or student shall access the TikTok application or website on University-owned or operated devices, including OU wired and wireless networks," David Horton, the Chief Information Officer and Senior Associate Vice President, wrote in the letter sent to students on Dec. 20.

"As a result of the Executive Order, access to the TikTok platform will be blocked and cannot be accessed from the campus network," the letter continued. "University-administered TikTok accounts must be deleted and alternate social media platforms utilized in their place."

The letter goes on to state TikTok, which operates under the control of the Chinese government, was banned by the governor due to "ongoing national and cybersecurity concerns with the TikTok application."

"Thank you for your cooperation," Horton concluded.

Gov. Stitt, a Republican, wrote an executive order on Dec. 8 that banned TikTok for all "state government agencies, employees and contractors on government networks or government-issued devices."

The devices include "state-issued cellphones, computers, or any other device capable of internet connectivity," he ordered.

"We will not participate in helping the Chinese Communist Party gain access to government information," Stitt said at the time.

"Maintaining the cybersecurity of state government is necessary to continue to serve and protect Oklahoma citizens and we will not participate in helping the Chinese Communist Party gain access to government information," the governor added.

Immediately following the governor's order, Northeastern State University, a public university located in Tahlequah, also banned the app.

NSU's University Relations department emailed students, staff, and faculty notifying them of the policy change on Dec. 9.

The email instructed employees and student organizations using official NSU TikTok accounts devices to delete them and to delete the app if "housed on NSU-owned, leased, or managed devices," according to the Tahlequah Daily Press.

"Northeastern State University is complying with Gov. Stitt's Executive Order 2022-33," wrote Dan Mabery, the Vice President for University Relations. "Therefore, university-owned/leased/managed equipment, including the NSU network, may not be used to download or access the TikTok application or website. As a result of the Executive Order, access to the TikTok social media platform will be blacklisted and cannot be accessed from the campus network."

Both President Biden and former President Donald Trump have raised issues with TikTok being used in the United States, similarly citing national security and surveillance issues, with the latter attempting to ban the app in its entirety.

TikTok is a social media app owned by the Chinese company ByteDance. It is commonly used by younger generations that allow users to share short videos with annotations or captions or virtually any topic.


New Case Filed: Phillips v. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed suit in state court Friday on behalf of a professor whom the North Carolina Governor’s School fired after he spoke out about the harms of the racially divisive ideology embraced by the school. Dr. David Phillips is a well-respected English professor who has spent eight summers teaching at the Governor’s School, a residential summer program for the state’s most talented rising high-school seniors.

For years, Phillips spoke out against the school’s increasing adoption of critical theory, an ideology that views everyone and everything through the lens of characteristics like race, sex, and religion, labeling people as perpetual oppressors or victims based on group membership alone. After Phillips delivered three optional seminars in June 2021 critiquing critical theory and the increasing bias and lack of viewpoint diversity in higher education, North Carolina public school officials fired him mid-session without any explanation.

“In an academic environment committed to exploring a wide range of differing viewpoints, as the Governor’s School claims to be, no teacher should be fired for offering a reasoned critique of critical theory. But that’s what happened to Dr. Phillips,” said ADF Senior Counsel Hal Frampton. “There is no lawful explanation for the way North Carolina public school officials treated Dr. Phillips. He was beloved, respected, and regarded by both students and faculty as an advocate for students who felt that their voices weren’t being heard and their perspectives weren’t welcomed at the Governor’s School. By firing him, the Governor’s School violated his constitutional right to free speech and unlawfully retaliated against him for deviating from the Governor’s School’s ideological orthodoxy.”

Over his eight years teaching at the Governor’s School, Phillips has encouraged his students to think for themselves and has notified the administration of the hostility that he and other students with “privileged” characteristics experienced. Phillips’ three optional seminars, which were similar to others he’d delivered in previous years and open to any student or staff member to attend if they so desired, discussed (1) a social psychology critique of some concepts from critical theory; (2) understanding speech through the lens of speech-act theory; and (3) the increasing ideological bias and lack of viewpoint diversity in higher education.

Following these lectures, a group of students and staff members reacted with open hostility, referencing race, gender, sexual orientation, and religion in their comments and questions. Despite the hostility, Phillips stayed long after the conclusion of each lecture to answer questions, even offering to meet with students later for further discussion. The day after Phillips’ third optional seminar, the Governor’s School fired him without warning or explanation. When he asked why, he was told no explanation would be given, and that there was no appeal or other recourse. Phillips had always received glowing performance reviews without a single negative comment up until the point of the lectures.

ADF attorneys filed the lawsuit, Phillips v. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, in the Superior Court for Wake County, North Carolina.

Alliance Defending Freedom:


University student banned from classes after she questioned the lecturer's controversial views about Australia

A mature-aged university student has been banned from class and told to take a re-education course for questioning her lecturer's anti-Australian views.

Grandmother Rae Rancie expressed her disagreement with some assertions made by her lecturer in the 'Politics of Indigenous Australia' unit at La Trobe University in Melbourne.

The lecturer allegedly said that Australia was a 's***hole country', that 'white people think they are the most superior race on the planet' and the country 'baulked at the thought of Peter Dutton as prime minister'.

For questioning the tutor's narrative, the grandmother claims she was on the receiving end of a lengthy diatribe and prohibited from attending class.

'I have been banned from classes, I had to listen online to a recording, and I was shocked,' she told Andrew Bolt on his Sky News Australia program.

'To be the subject of a nine-minute humiliating tirade from the lecturer calling me 'a difficult student', 'that person', I was 'making her go crazy,' I was 'a real life example of racism and disrespectful behaviour,' how she encourages speech in her workshops, but not my type of speech.'

But Ms Rancie admitted to also making some more controversial statements during her class, which fuelled her tutor's heated response.

While her class spoke about the Stolen Generation, Ms Rancie said: 'I don't think they are stolen anymore. They get taken away from harmful situations. It's the government's responsibility to do it.'

She also suggested that parents 'failing to look after their children' was the reason why so many indigenous children were in detention.

The problematic comments got Ms Rancie banned from class, and she was also advised to take a re-education course. But when she applied to do the re-education course she 'heard crickets'.

Ms Rancie said one one of the reasons she chose to continue questioning her lecturer's narrative was because other students in her class told her in private that they agreed with her.

After passing the class, Ms Rancie sent her lecturer an email wishing her a Merry Christmas and attached a video of Aboriginal senator Jacinta Price speaking.

She explained that she asked her lecturer in the email to look at 'both sides of the argument'. 'I've been told that that was very intimidating and I'm in line for another disciplinary process,' Ms Rancie said.

La Trobe University told Daily Mail Australia in a statement: 'As a university La Trobe welcomes and encourages diverse and opposing views and opinions, however we expect debate to be conducted in a respectful manner.'

'If a student behaves disruptively or disrespectfully towards others in class, we will take necessary disciplinary action, including requiring the student to attend a course in respectful behaviour.'

'As this particular matter is subject to ongoing investigation, we cannot comment further.'




Tuesday, December 20, 2022

Texas Legislation Strikes Back Against University-Backed Discrimination

Texas state Rep. Carl Tepper, R-Lubbock County, has introduced legislation to abolish “diversity, equity, and inclusion” departments and programs in public universities.

The two-page piece of legislation removes the universities’ ability to fund, promote, sponsor, or support any department, program, or office that “funds, sponsors, or supports an initiative or formulation of diversity, equity, and inclusion beyond what is necessary to uphold the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

Universities taking money from the Texas government would no longer be allowed to promote or decry any group based on their immutable characteristics. Specifically, the bill would prevent any university from officially endorsing, dissuading, or interfering with any “lifestyle, race, sex, religion, or culture.”

Tepper’s bill follows a flood of woke, pro-segregation activism from progressives across the nation in the last few years. Racially-charged policies under the guise of “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion” have become all too common.

Since 2020, several universities have created task forces or departments to combat “white supremacy” on their campuses. At Arizona State University in 2021, progressive students accosted two white students for sitting in their DEI office-endorsed “multicultural space.” Dozens of speaking events have been canceled by university administrations for not being diverse, equitable, or inclusive enough.

Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at The Heritage Foundation, elaborates:

DEI offices have been used to enforce a favored political orthodoxy and activism, rather than foster viewpoint diversity. They are heavy on identity politics and light on free expression. Campus surveys find DEI offices and their vast bureaucracies fail to improve the campus climate for students. Instead, they contribute to ever-growing college administrative bloat, funded by taxpayers.

Rep. Tepper told The Daily Signal that the time for a bill that fights back against state-funded discrimination is now. “Departments are running amuck practicing ‘reverse racism’,” Tepper said.

Tepper pointed to one example from Texas Tech University, in which the college’s Division of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion encouraged students to “understand [their] personal relationship to white supremacy and anti-Black racism.” The “#Academics4BlackLives” program encourages black students at Texas Tech to withdraw into black communities, blaming other cultural groups for societal issues.

Tepper warned, “It’s one thing to understand the different experiences we all have—that’s obvious, but encouraging more racism doesn’t help any situation.”

In 2021, the Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion staff at Texas Tech held an “anti-racism” training in which students were forcibly segregated by color.

When asked what the role of activism on college campuses was to be in light of this piece of legislation, Tepper responded, “Students should feel free to form any group they want, but I don’t believe in [Texas] funding segregation.”

While the bill is expected to be a tough fight in the Texas House, Tepper remains confident that H.B. 1006 is exactly what Lone Star universities need: “Keep your eye out; the public’s fed up. A lot of tax dollars are flowing into these universities, and with tuition skyrocketing—dollars should go to operating costs and education, not woke activism.”


Scotland: A law student who sued her university after it launched a disciplinary investigation for saying women have vaginas' during a class on transgender issues has had her case dismissed

Mother-of-two Lisa Keogh, 30, was investigated by Abertay University in Dundee during the summer after classmates complained that she made 'hateful, discriminatory, sexist, racist and transphobic' remarks during an online seminar on gender politics.

She was cleared of the misconduct charges after the university's disciplinary board found there was no evidence that she had discriminated against anyone during a two-month probe - which took place while she underwent her final year exams this year.

Ms Keogh launched legal action claiming that the institution broke the Equality Act 2010 by pursuing her for 'expressing her gender critical beliefs' and caused 'stress at the most crucial part of my university career', but her case was dismissed by Dundee Sheriff Court.

Sheriff Gregor Murray dismissed the bid and upheld submissions made by lawyers acting for Abertay last week, saying the university 'was entitled to take steps to investigate complaints'.

The mature student said she is considering an appeal against the ruling and thanked her supporters. She said: 'We are very disappointed with this result and I am currently considering an appeal. I will be meeting with my legal team to discuss moving forward.

'I want to thank everyone for the tremendous support you have given me so far both moral and financial. I hope you will continue to support me moving forward. 'We are currently planning on moving platforms for crowdfunding which will make donating much easier. Thank you all.'

Supporters of gender critical views believe people cannot change sex.

In his written judgment, Sheriff Murray said: 'The defender was entitled to take steps to investigate complaints.

'It could not be guilty of discrimination simply because it did so. Following investigation in this case, the complaint against the pursuer was not upheld.'

Miss Keogh previously argued that the university's actions had amounted to 'a direct attack on my right to free speech'.

She also said she was the victim of a 'modern day witch-hunt' and that the complaints were 'groundless' and the process 'needlessly cruel'.


Harvard’s Latest Discrimination Problem: Antisemitism

While Harvard University is currently before the Supreme Court defending its admissions policies that discriminate against Asian and white students, a recently released report found that the Ivy League university is suffering from discrimination of another kind: antisemitism.

An annual report for the year 2021 released by the AMCHA Initiative, a non-profit dedicated to combating antisemitism, ranked Harvard as the top school for “assaults on Jewish identity.” With 25 incidents reported, Harvard’s total nearly doubled the University of Chicago, which came in second with 13 incidents in 2021, with instances of antisemitism split into three categories: redefinition, denigration and suppression.

The AMCHA defines redefinition as the belief that Zionism and Judaism have nothing to do with each other and that support of Israel is a “colonial political project that exploits Judaism,” while denigration is the attempt to vilify those who do support Israel or Jews with “undue privilege, power or influence.” Suppression calls for boycotting, divesting, and sometimes shutting down events, programs, or beliefs that are deemed Zionist, according to the group.

Harvard had 14 incidents of redefinition, 16 of denigration and 13 of suppression in 2021, according to AMCHA’s report, with many of the incidents overlapping all three categories.

AMCHA Director Tammi Rossman-Benjamin told the Daily Caller News Foundation that universities have a hard time “spotting antisemitism.”

“The massive assault on Jewish identity — attempts to chisel away and erase students’ connection to their Jewish faith, people, and history — on campuses across the country is no coincidence,” Rossman-Benjamin explained. “It is the latest strategy adopted by those who traffic in antisemitism, whether from the right or the left, to further normalize antisemitism and make it easier to harass, bully and abuse Jews on campus, and harder for Jewish students to seek recourse.”

Two Jewish Harvard students, Zachary Lech and Alex Bernat, told DCNF expressed that during their time at the university antisemitism was not uncommon and realized that it was also not a priority for the administration.

“Harvard wants to shine [a light] on what is currently popular without necessarily taking into consideration the practical ramifications,” Lech, who is a also CAMERA Campus Fellow, said. “They are less, in my view, interested about actual wellbeing as they are in looking good.”

“Quite frankly, the easiest way to frame it is Jews look white and, therefore, you know, it doesn’t work. They don’t care,” Bernat explained.

Bernat and Lech mentioned an event on campus involving Palestinian activist Mohammed El-Kurd, who is originally from Eastern Jerusalem and previously called Zionism a “death cult,” “murderous,” “genocidal” and “sadistic,” according to the Jewish News Syndicate.

During the event, a Jewish student, who is a close friend of Bernat, asked El-Kurd to condemn the acts of terrorism committed by Palestinians against Jewish citizens in Israel. El-Kurd refused and “got tons of applause for it,” Bernat stated.

While Lech and Bernat stated they believe everyone has the right to speak and give their opinion on a subject, both expressed frustration that their concerns about rhetoric like El-Kurd’s were not taken seriously. Lech said the university had a pattern of responding to the concerns of other marginalized groups, but not to the Jewish community.

“My cynical answer would be that yes to some extent Harvard is very comfortable to allow this kind of discrimination to happen on campus just because it’s [commitment] to issues regarding DEI is superficial at best and more done out of a sense that this is what is socially accepted these days and not out of genuine concern for the well being of any group,” Lech said.

Bernat told the DCNF that one of the pro-Palestine groups was allowed to hold this year’s annual “Israel Apartheid Week” during the Jewish holiday of Passover from Apr. 18-22. The Hillel chapter on campus held a “Stand With Israel” rally to combat “the anti-Israel apartheid week,” according to the university’s student newspaper the Harvard Crimson.

Bernat said Jewish high school seniors looking to attend the prestigious university should be aware of what they are walking into. He clarified that most of the time it’s fine, but when it’s not it’s hard to ignore.

“If someone’s Jewish identity is strongly tied to Israel it must feel like a dangerous space,” Lech said.

Rossman-Benjamin noted that a “new solution” was needed.

“University administrators must acknowledge that harassment and bullying that denies Jewish students – or any student – of the ability to fully participate in campus life should never be tolerated, and they must establish a singe behavioral standard for responding to harassing behavior, irrespective of the motivation of the perpetrator or the identity of the victim,” she stated.

El-Kurd, and Harvard did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact




Monday, December 19, 2022

Affordability Remains Top Consideration on Where and Whether Students Attend College

Survey results released this summer by EAB of nearly 5,000 students who graduated from high school in 2021 revealed that test-optional admissions policies have had significant DEI impacts on college applications.

Overall, 15% of Gen Z students say they applied to a school specifically because it did not require them to submit an SAT or ACT score with their application. Black and Hispanic/Latinx students were much more likely (24% and 21%, respectively) than their White or Asian counterparts (12% and 15%, respectively) to apply to a school because of its test-optional policy.

“The majority of higher ed institutions suspended or permanently discontinued testing requirements during the pandemic, and many schools still do not require students to submit SAT or ACT scores,” said EAB’s dean of enrollment management Madeleine Rhyneer. “Unfortunately, schools aren’t doing a very good job of making it clear to students whether their institution is test-optional for every academic program and scholarship. Schools looking to diversify enrollment would be well-served by clarifying and promoting their testing policies.”

The new EAB survey also showed that college affordability continues to be the top consideration in whether and where students apply and enroll. Thirtysix percent say they picked their institution for its “affordable tuition.” Roughly one-third of Black (32%) and Hispanic/Latinx (35%) respondents who decided not to attend college this year said that cost concerns drove their decision.

As the number of high school graduates who enroll in college continues to decline, schools are getting more creative in how they attract and engage prospective students. Some have begun offering $1,000 “bonus” scholarships, added to the aid package when a student enrolls, to incentivize applicants to make a campus visit. This bonus scholarship incentive was favored by 64% of EAB survey respondents, making it far more popular than other potential choices, including free school apparel (39%) or reimbursement for campus visit travel costs (39%).

Not all students are interested or able to make in-person campus visits a staple of their college search experience. Seventy-five percent of survey respondents said they took at least one virtual campus tour during 2021, a 50% increase from the 2020 school year.

“Getting a prospective student to visit your campus in person has been a staple of college recruiting for years,” Rhyneer added. “It makes perfect sense since a campus visit is strongly correlated with a student’s decision to enroll. However, since many families lack the resources or flexibility to travel, creating an effective virtual tour of your campus has become critically important, especially for schools looking to diversify their applicant pool.”

EAB collected survey responses from 4,848 students who graduated from high school in 2021. The report also includes analysis of student behavioral data from more than 1,100 partner colleges and universities.

From kindergarten to college to career, EAB partners with leaders and practitioners to accelerate progress and drive results across five major areas: enrollment, student success, institutional strategy, data analytics, and DEI.


Bill to ban biological males from girls' sports teams fails in Ohio General Assembly

A bill that would have banned biological males from playing on girls' sports teams in Ohio failed to pass in the state's General Assembly last Thursday.

The amended bill, which cleared the state Senate, 23-7, before it narrowly fell in the statehouse, would also have given the governor greater power over the state Department of Education and banned discrimination against students based on COVID-19 vaccination status.

Republican state Rep. Jena Powell introduced the transgender student-athlete amendment to the bill, which was originally intended to address the Ohio Teacher Residency Program.

The amendment said no school or athletic conference "shall permit individuals of the male sex to participate on athletic teams or in athletic competitions designated only for participants of the female sex."

A provision in the bill that would have mandated students undergo "internal and external" exams to determine their biological sex was taken out of the bill earlier this month. A subsequent provision was also removed that would have required student-athletes whose "sex is disputed" to prove their biological sex with a birth certificate.

Republican Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, though he voiced support for overhauling education oversight, has previously expressed his opinion that Ohio legislators should not be addressing the issue of transgender students in sports.

"This issue is best addressed outside of government through individual sports leagues and athletic associations, including the Ohio High School Athletic Association, who can tailor policies to meet the needs of their member athletes and member institutions," DeWine has said.

The Ohio High School Athletic Association has said there is no evidence that biological males who identify as transgender are posing a problem and that there are few transgender student-athletes in the state.

There have been 15 transgender student-athletes in Ohio since the 2015-2016 school year, with seven transgender females in high school sports and eight transgender females at the seventh- and eighth-grade level, according to the association.

Despite the bill's failure, some form of it could be taken up again during the next legislative session, when Republicans will hold a firmer majority in the state House of Representatives. Republicans presently hold 64 of the House's 99 seats and will pick up three more next year.


Ohio teacher says she was forced to resign after telling principal using students' preferred pronouns violated her religion

A former Ohio middle school teacher said she was forced to resign after telling the principal that she would not address students by their preferred pronouns because of her religious beliefs.

Vivian Geraghty, 24, is now engaged in a lawsuit against the Jackson Memorial Middle School principal, the Board of Education, and two employees of the school district.

Geraghty, who is Christian, worked at the Massillon, Ohio school teaching art until her abrupt resignation on August 26.

The school had adopted a policy that said its teachers would abide by the wishes of students as far as the names and pronouns they want to be called

The school had adopted a policy that said its teachers would abide by the wishes of students as far as the names and pronouns they want to be called

A federal lawsuit filed last week states that prior to her resignation, she 'taught her class while remaining consistent with her religious practices and scientific understanding concerning human identity, gender, and sex.'

Earlier in August, two of Geraghty's students requested that she begin using names that were consistent 'with their new gender identities rather than their legal names.'

One of the students, according to the suit, also wanted to be addressed by new 'preferred' pronouns. The suit also noted that the school had a policy that required teachers to use the pronouns requested by students.

The policy flouted Geraghty's religious beliefs prompting her to meet with principal Kacy Carter 'in the hope of reaching a solution that would allow her to continue teaching without violating her religious beliefs and constitutional rights.'
Ohio principal Kacy Carter, who allegedly told Geraghty that she would have to change her faith-based beliefs or resign

Ohio principal Kacy Carter, who allegedly told Geraghty that she would have to change her faith-based beliefs or resign

Following her conversation with Carter, Geraghty was called into a separate meeting with the principal and district employee Monica Myers.

During the second meeting, Geraghty was told she would be 'required to put her beliefs aside as a public servant' and any unwillingness to do so would be read as insubordination, according to the lawsuit.

When the teacher held her ground, she was sent back to her classroom only to be pulled out minutes later and instructed to either change her mind, or resign her position.

Feeling as though she had no other option, she opted to resign and submitted a letter of resignation. She was then escorted out of the building.

Attorneys from the Alliance Defending Freedom, which has taken up Geraghty's case, said that the school failed to consider any possibilities that could accommodate Geraghty and her students, like moving her to a different classroom, or having her call students by their last names.

The suit alleges that the school's policy is unevenly enforces given that, Kacy, for instance, is able to avoid using pronouns altogether in his position. The ADF additionally argued that Geraghty should not have been placed in a position where she was required to choose 'between her faith and her job.'

Logan Spena, counsel for the ADF, wrote, 'No school official can force a teacher to set her religious beliefs aside in order to keep her job.'

'The First Amendment prohibits that abuse of power.'

Religious Christians generally take an unsympathetic view toward the transgender movement in the US. According to Focus on the Family, parents and other community leaders - including teachers - should refrain from 'acquiesc(ing)' to the 'gender struggle' some children may experience without 'considering the more important responsibility of shepherding their eternal souls.'

'Putting your acceptance of your children’s preferences and behavior above their relationship with God doesn’t truly help them,' read the site.




Sunday, December 18, 2022

Students at "New School" university in New York occupy campus, demand A-grades for everyone

The New School was a haven for Marxism from its beginning. Not much seems to have changed. "New" was once code for "Communist": Now very old and obsolete

Harvey Goldman says he pulled his 9-year-old daughter out of a Manhattan private school saying, ‘little children don’t need to feel bad about the color of their skin.’

Students at an elite, private university in New York City are occupying a campus building with the demand that all be given A grades.

The original reason for The New School occupation, which began on December 8, was to support striking faculty members who were lobbying for higher wages and better health care.

Though the faculty strike has since been resolved, a letter of demands now calls for A grades for all students. It says in part: "We demand that every student receives a final course grade of A as well as the removal of I/Z grades for the Fall 2022 semester." The letter insisted, "Attendance shall have no bearing on course grade." (According to the New School’s website, an "I" grade is a "temporary incomplete" and a "z" grade is an "unofficial withdrawal.")

The letter also states that occupying students demand a refund "for the loss of instructional time due to the strike" and that "this tuition refund will be proportional to the duration of the semester during which the strike is in effect."

Students are also calling for the resignations of the school’s president, provost, vice president and the disbandment of the Board of Trustees. Other demands include a tuition freeze from 2023 to 2028. As reported by The Daily Caller, students are also demanding for the university president’s house "be treated as a communal property."

Assistant Vice President of Communications and Public Affairs Amy Malsin commented to Fox News Digital on the unfolding situation: "The university supports peaceful free expression by our students, and we are listening closely to all of our students' concerns."

She indicated that "faculty retain autonomy about how to conduct and grade their courses."

There are approximately 10,000 students at New School. Tuition is $26,854 a semester or $51,900 for a full year.

According to The New School’s "about" page, the university is committed to "developing students who will have an impact on the world and address the most pressing social issues of our time."

It adds that "this effort is bolstered by the university’s Office of Equity, Inclusion, and Social Justice, which is committed to fostering an equitable, inclusive, and socially just environment for our community." Social justice battles have become heated at many universities across the country.

In 2021, a fed-up father pulled his daughter out of Heschel School, an elite New York City private school and moved her to Florida after becoming frustrated with the focus on race-related curriculum. Harvey Goldman told "Fox and Friends First" that "little children don’t need to feel bad about the color of their skin."


Poisonous Oberlin College FINALLY pays out $25M to Ohio family bakery it tried to destroy with false accusations of racism

Their insane "blacks can do no wrong" ideology finally costs them

Oberlin College has completed paying out a $25million judgment to an Ohio bakery that won a libel lawsuit against the school after a shoplifting incident involving three black students.

The store's owners, Allyn Gibson and his son, David Gibson, sued Oberlin College in 2017, claiming they had been libeled by the school and their business had been harmed following protests over the shoplifting.

Both died before the settlement was reached and had said at the time that the claims had pushed the store to the bring of closure.

The yearlong legal fight involving a school and town known for its liberal leanings erupted into a debate over racism, free speech and political correctness.

A Lorain County jury in 2019 awarded the Gibsons $44 million in damages, which a judge later reduced to $25 million.

The Ohio Supreme Court in August said it would not take up an appeal of the judgment.

All of the money has now been paid, Brandon McHugh, attorney for the Gibsons, told WKYC-TV in Cleveland on Thursday.

In addition to the $25 million judgement, the school paid more than $11 million in attorney fees and interest.

The lawsuit was filed after David Gibson's son, also named Allyn, chased and tackled a black male student he suspected of having stolen a bottle of wine in 2016.

Two black female students who were with the male student tried to intervene. All three were arrested and later pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges.

The arrests triggered protests outside Gibson's Bakery where flyers were handed out, some by an Oberlin College vice president and dean of students, accusing the Gibsons of being racist.

A Student Senate resolution condemning the Gibsons was emailed to all students and was posted in a display case at the school's student center, where it remained for a year.

Oberlin College officials ordered its campus food provider to stop buying bakery items from Gibson's.

The two original owners who brought the suit have since died. David Gibson died in November 2019 at age 65. Allyn Gibson died in February. He was 93.

The college had been ordered to pay after jurors ruled that it had defamed Gibson's Bakery by describing the institution as racist, after the storeowner chased down three black students who stole from the business in November 2016.

With legal fees and interest, the amount rose to over $36.5 million.

A lawyer for the bakery celebrated the huge settlement on Thursday. 'With Oberlin's decision to not pursue any additional appeals, the Gibson Family's fight is finally over,' said Brandon McHugh, an attorney for the family. 'Truth still matters, and David has overcome Goliath.'

McHugh said the ruling meant the family firm was saved from collapse.

'While Oberlin College has still refused to admit they were wrong, the jury, a unanimous panel from the court of appeals, and a majority of the Ohio Supreme Court decided otherwise,' he said.

'Now, the Gibsons will be able to rebuild the business their family started 137 years ago and keep the lights on for another generation.'

The anger at Oberlin was whipped up by the former dean of students, Meredith Raimondo, who led the woke mob's attacks against Gibson's - and even turned up outside the business to screech accusations while toting a bullhorn.

While named as a defendant in the suit, she won't have to pay the settlement.

And despite the disgrace she heaped on her former employer, Raimondo has now landed a cozy job at Oglethorpe Liberal Arts College in Atlanta, and has yet to speak out over her role in the costly scandal.


UC-Berkeley law school under federal investigation after Zionist speakers banned

The U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights is opening an investigation into the University of California, Berkeley Law School over its response to several student organizations who adopted a pledge to not invite any Zionist or pro-Israel speaker to give lectures.

Law Students for Justice in Palestine at Berkeley Law wrote in an Aug. 21 Instagram post that nine student organizations adopted a "pro-Palestine bylaw" stating that their group "will not" invite speakers who hold views in support of Zionism or "the apartheid state of Israel."

Berkeley Law Muslim Student Association, Middle Eastern and North African Law Students Association, Womxn of Color Collective, Asian Pacific American Law Students Association, Queer Caucus, Community Defense Project, Women of Berkeley Law, and Law Students of African Descent were among the student organizations who signed the Law Students for Justice in Palestine at Berkeley Law pledge.

University of California, Berkeley entrance sign on the corner of Oxford Street and Center Street at Berkeley, California.
University of California, Berkeley entrance sign on the corner of Oxford Street and Center Street at Berkeley, California. (iStock)

A complaint was filed with the Department of Education on Nov. 18 by Gabriel Groisman, an attorney at LSN Law in Miami, and Arsen Ostrovsky, attorney and CEO at International Legal Forum in Tel Aviv, Israel.

The complaint alleges that while Berkeley Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky condemned the proposed bylaw, he didn't take enough action which is necessary as part of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

"Although we acknowledge that Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of Berkeley Law School, has condemned the adopted by-law, describing it as 'very troubling' and noting that according to their framing, he too would be banned because he supports the existence of the State of Israel, he has neither called for their revocation, nor has he taken any meaningful action in response to this egregious act of discrimination, as required under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act," the complaint letter states.

The pair of lawyers received a letter from the Department of Education on Tuesday, stating that its Office for Civil Rights will be investigating the issue to determine if the university "failed to respond appropriately" to the incident.

In an Aug. 25 email to leaders of all student organizations, Chemerinsky harshly criticized the bylaw and said he wouldn't be invited to speak at these organizations if the pledge was applied.

"It is troubling to broadly exclude a particular viewpoint from being expressed. Indeed, taken literally, this would mean that I could not be invited to speak because I support the existence of Israel, though I condemn many of its policies," Chemerinsky said.

In a statement on Thursday, Groisman and Ostrovsky applauded the Department of Education's decision to open an investigation.