Milk has been a mainstay of school lunches for centuries. However, Williamson believes it is time to explore alternatives for a variety of nutritional and environmental reasons. She notes that forty-two percent of American households bought plant milk in 2021.
Williamson has followed a vegetarian diet, but was told by the school that she would need a doctor’s note to get a plant-based beverage instead of dairy with her lunch. She then did something that one would think the school would support: she became an advocate. She gave out non-dairy samples and sought to have a “day of action” heralding the benefits of non-dairy milk. The administration agreed to allow the event but told her she had to include pro-milk literature.
Her lawyers argued that this is an example of the hold of the milk industry and the Department of Agriculture on school. USDA guidelines require milk to be served with public school lunches. The milk is subsidized by the Department and this brings big bucks to the industry. An estimated seven percent of U.S. liquid dairy milk is consumed in schools.
In Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court famously declared that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” This would seem precisely what Tinker was meant to protect.
It is bizarre that the district would make Williamson’s advocacy contingent on her agreeing to pass out literature in favor of the industry that she opposes. It is like telling students during the 60s that they could pass out anti-war literature so long as it included pro-war or military recruitment flyers.
Williamson’s advocacy was not disruptive for the school. Indeed, it would have allowed for a beneficial debate on an interesting issue with environmental, nutritional, and philosophical elements. That seems a lot more educational than the usual hallway banter over the latest TikTok star. The financial arrangement over milk distribution only makes this prior restraint more problematic.
The underlying right, however, can be a double edged sword. Many on the left are supporting Colorado in a major free speech case before the Supreme Court: 303 Creative v. Elenis. In that case, Lori Smith, a graphic artist, is seeking the right to decline clients due to her religious objections to same-sex marriages. The state is asserting the right to not only compel such speech (by requiring Smith to do the work) but also to prevent Elenis from putting a statement on her website on her religious objections. Thus, it is a both a compelled speech and censorship case.
In this case, the school could have allowed any students to present countervailing, pro-milk literature. It could also have placed such literature in the cafeteria to explain the benefits of milk from the perspective of the district. Those seem reasonable alternatives to requiring a student to pass out pro-milk material as a condition for advocating for alternatives to milk.
Williamson could always quote Harvey Milk in her fight to speak out against milk: “I have tasted freedom. I will not give up that which I have tasted.”
Kudos to Turley for giving a thumbs up to what appears to be a liberal student trying to do what she advocates for others in the proper way. Conservatives, I think, will support liberal causes, even ones that they disagree with, as long as the advocates obey the law. act fairly, and do not infringe upon the rights of others to reject their advocacy. Whether vegan milk or cow’s milk is better for one should be something we can scientifically determine. Chances are it’s already been well-determined. All animals, including humans, have dietary needs according to their genomes and digestive systems. I should no more expect the white tail deer in my yard to eat snakes and mice than I should expect the gorgeous brown stripped hawks to eat grass and flowers. Give kids in school a balance of good food from all sources. In today’s world, I worry more about schools meeting their educational needs than their nutritional needs.
Political lobbying in any form should be barred from high school campuses just like it’s barred from the workplace. If the girl doesn’t want to drink milk, she can bring her almond milk or whatever from home. Politics in any form has no place on campuses below college level. At least college students are (supposed to be) adults.
“Political lobbying in any form should be barred from high school campuses just like it’s barred from the workplace.”
That would be a violation of the 1st amendment right of the student. A school is a government entity therefore it’s bound by the 1st amendment. Lobbying itself is 1st amendment protected activity just as private companies can lobby for schools to promote milk as the only alternative.
Lobbying AT a private company workplace is NOT protected by the 1st amendment. They are not bound by the prohibitions imposed by the amendment. That’s the difference.
“Politics in any form has no place on campuses below college level.”
Nope. Even students have free speech rights. Even Turley would be hard pressed to argue that political speech is also protected in any school. There is no age limit on who can exercise free speech rights.
She is free to complain, but she is also free to bring her own, since she is the only one who drinks that crap.
She may not be the only one. These days more people drink almond milk or soy milk than regular milk. What is not being said is that alternatives to regular milk are becoming more popular and is gaining ground on the regular milk market. That may be what concerns the dairy industry because they hold a big chunk of the market and any competition is no appreciated. So it’s understandable that the dairy industry lobbies government to promote only milk as the “standard” in school lunches. It’s essentially an anti-capitalist strategy of limiting competition through government.
I guess there’s no such thing as a student’s right to eat lunch in peace without being harrassed by someone’s pet cause.
No, there isn’t. Maybe that’s a bad thing, maybe it isn’t. There’s no right not to be annoyed.
I used to have health issues with dairy and drank the alternatives for awhile. Glad I can drink milk again. Too much cows milk can make me feel sludgy, but my body tolerates whole, raw goats milk pretty well. I have enjoyed drinking hempmilk.
Nonetheless, I think this is a hoot:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/30/c8/36/30c836696697a2bbbfd1d6e5d73a1175.jpg
Prairie Rose,
HA! Thank you for the laugh!
Karma is a wonderful thing. I do hope Tom Fitton comes to this student’s assistance to inform the prog/left just what our constitution guarantees.
The genius of this nation is that it was founded by those who understood and experienced tyranny. Whether a person agrees with another, it is our foundational right to advocate or protest any cause we choose to champion. Students should be encouraged to thoughtfully and peacefully stand up for a cause the impassions them.
What she is learning at an early age is that there are organizations or industries who protect their interests and who do not espouse opposition. It is good that she learns this lesson now.
There is a present trend to trash our nation, its laws, faith-based citizens, and the ingredients of what made this nation great. And this nation is truly great! The irony is that those who assail our country, tradition and traditional values would not be able to do this unless they lived in a nation that was founded on traditional values of liberty and human value.
It is also interesting how the word “vegan” tends to make some people angry. It certainly elicits emotion, good or bad.
She should be allowed to be as pushy and annoying as she likes, and advocate for the latest feel-good thing. After all, she’ll be in college soon, where she’ll be expected to run the University and tell everyone in the world how they should, or must, live. You can’t let things like an education or curriculum interfere with that.
Maybe the school was trying to use this as a learning lesson in Free Speech by presenting both sides of an issue for this young woman.
Instead she learned when you dont get your way, sue!
And I agree with others, unless the school has some weird rule that a student cannot bring their own lunch to school (hey, it is CA after all), brown bag it. Or at least the “milk.”
I fail to see the need for the young lady to also espouse the opposing view. Once again we see a school district acting like they never read the constitution (and they probably have not). I don’t see any reason for any objection to her advocacy either medically or legally. Lactose intolerance is a common phenomenon in humans with varying severity in many different groups due to varying levels of the lactase enzyme. It can be treated with lactase supplements, less milk, low lactose milk or non dairy milk. If anything her advocacy is more reasonable than pushing total dairy milk.
Strangely enough, not everyone likes milk but it is a strong component in the diet for supplying calcium. Young women particularly don’t drink much dairy milk and this has been shown in studies from Purdue University, in the not too distant past, to contribute to less calcium intake and more pronounced osteoporosis in later life. It can be counteracted by calcium fortified other drinks like Hawaiian Punch which is what Purdue used in their studies. They recruited young women in their early teens to camps at Purdue University where calcium intake and excretion was strictly monitored over 6 weeks in camp and then for years after with bone scans and bone density scans. The researcher was voted into the National Academy of Science for this work.
I would protest to “let them eat cake”, as that means people tend to lose their head mentally and physically.
I also am not a Vegan or Vegetarian, just a predator (so no conflict of interest)
GEB,
The number of women I have known being vegan or vegetarian, they were all pale, seemed always sick, and lethargic.
Public Schools are not a free frawl. She is free to do it…OFF SCHOOL PROPERTY!
Imagine if every idiot kid was handing out their stupid ideas!
BTW a plant based diet is VERY unhealthy. India has lots of practicians…they also have TERRIBLE problems with B12 deficiencies… B12 is naturally present in foods of animal origin, including fish, meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy products
She is free to do it…OFF SCHOOL PROPERTY!
Students and teachers rights do not end upon entering the school house gate, as long as they are not interfering in the school’s educational mission.
I personally only drink nonfat dairy milk. So imagine if this school district provided only non dairy (soy) products for school meals. Wouldn’t you want the right to advocate for dairy milk at school?
I have no problem with her advocating for drinking plant juice and I agree it is absurd to force her to advocate for cow’s milk.
However, I have a problem with calling plant juice of any kind “milk”. Referring to liquids produced from plants a form of “milk” strikes me as a manipulative, fraudulent advertising gimmick.
The common, long understood definition society has used for milk is that it is an excretion from the mammary glands of mammals. Cows produce milk. Female humans – the real ones not mentally unstable cross dressing men – produce milk. Female goats – not the fake male goats who run around pretending to be female goats – produce milk.
Marketing the liquids produced from soy, almonds and other plants as “milk” is a deceptive advertising trick.
We drink the juice squeezed from oranges, limes, grapefruit, and apples. We refer to those drinks as orange juice, lime juice, grapefruit juice, and apple juice. Nobody calls it orange milk, lime milk, grapefruit milk, and apple milk, because fruits are not mammals.
Remember, in 1981, under Reagan, the USDA attempted to classify ketchup as a “vegetable.” Never mind that tomatoes are a fruit, and ketchup is a sugar condiment.
LOL, that’s a good one. Just like ‘other natural flavors” and “natural flavors” in the list of ingredients on most products. The term “natural” being used in the vaguest of ways.
Just for accuracy’s sake, almond milk, referred to as such, goes back to the 13th century. Soy milk almost as far. I expect the ‘milkiness’ of the liquid was the reason for the informal names. I don’t think they were scheming to take market share from dairy milk back then, though I could be mistaken about that. More likely they were trying to ensure they had food and drink.
Since fruit juices aren’t milky in any way, other than both being liquids, there’s no inpulse to call them milk.
(Slightly OT)
“. . . the benefits of dairy-free milk.”
Along with the “benefits” of: tasteless ice cream, meatless meat, popcorn without salt or butter, BBQ kale instead of hot dogs, bland chips, no a/c, no road trips, no humor, etc., ad nauseam.
In other words: Rid life of anything pleasurable.
I have no problem with people eating and drinking what they prefer, for whatever reason, but it’s worth noting that replacements often require far more processing than the ‘originals,’ at a time when we are also being encouraged to eat foods which have been minimally processed.
If JT has accurately captured the facts, then this lawsuit is a lay down win for girl. It will be settled immediately.
High school student Marielle Williamson has retained lawyers for arguing against milk in public schools. What ever happened to just bringing your own lunch to school ? True equity at work in California. Thank you, Jonathan, for an excellent article.
I wonder if she’s ever had any Real Cows Milk,from back when most all the school kids were Skinny & unvaxxed, & just who the heck is the USDA & why are they still allowed to exist?
I haven’t heard anything more on the Amos Miller vs USDA case, we’ll see.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=Amos+Miller+vs+USDA&ia=web
Advocacy always morphs into demands.
The vegetarian/vegan thing has has been ongoing. But it has morphed into John Kerry lying about animal agriculture. Pushing for the criminaliztion of raising meat, dairy.
It morphs into govt regulations that make raising animals cost prohibitive.
An adolescent teen wants to advocate for a choice. But that will morph into demands to ban dairy. Appeasement never works for these radical fringe notions.
So what? Free speech is the price of a free society.
What if it morphs into just an alternative to regular milk? If people want another choice and “morphs” into a demand for another choice why would that be wrong? Just because it involves another choice is not going to be an automatic ban on the other.
Absolutely this Student should have the right to advocate for the milk of her choice.
Frankly, Government should not be involved in the education of our kids or the food they eat or the milk they drink.
As with everything that govenrment does – they botch it.
Open the door to government preventing teenage pregnancies and what do we get ? Increasing teenage pregnancies
and kindergarten teachers trying to indoctrinate stundents into abnormal sexuality
Iowan2 is correct to fear this students advocacy morphing into left wing government coercion – as we have seen over and over.
But we can not sacrifice free speech – just because those like you use it to advocate for fascism.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance against the forces of evil.
Are you aware of the association between Harvey Milk and the People’s Temple (Jim Jones)? It’s an interesting story and worth some research.
Apparently, everything in Cali is just upside down. Then again, most Dim-run organizations are likewise. I hope this young lady wins millions, financially bankrupts an already intellectually bankrupt school. Then she and I can enjoy a fine glass of oat or soy milk with some liberal tears for a chaser. Damn these tyrants!
PS to JT: Harvey might not be the best example of what happens to a free speech advocate.
The student is welcome to ask the school for a milk alternative but the school has absolutely no obligation to meet the specific food demands of every individual student that walks through their doors. If the school chooses to offer alternative milk products because they perceive that the demand is high enough to include that in their menu and it won’t go to waste that’s fine.
SOLUTION: If a student doesn’t like or can’t eat what the school serves for lunches then bring your own lunch to school.
There, problem solved.
That said…
Jonathan Turley wrote, “Williamson wanted to pass out literature on the benefits of dairy-free milk. However, she was told that she could not distribute the literature unless she also passed out pro-milk literature.”
Creating an arbitrary rule specifically to control the actions of one particular student thereby forcing that student to pass out pro-milk literature when that was the exact opposite of their purpose was wrong. Was it illegal or unconstitutional, I honestly don’t think so. Was it unethical, yes. Could they have handled it better by having other students pass out pro-milk literature or simply having other pro-milk literature available at the same time, you bet. Could they have just told the student that the event was not approved, you bet. There’s lot’s of could of, should of, would of hindsight to be had with this one, starting with the student’s initial demand of the school all the way through to the school making an arbitrary new rule to specifically control the actions of one particular student for one possible event.
Personally, I think the law suite should be thrown out, it’s BS.
SW:
“Was it illegal or unconstitutional, I honestly don’t think so. ”
***********************
Oh just patently so.We’ll keep that seat on SCOTUS open for you when you pass US Constitution 101!
mespo727272 wrote, “Oh just patently so.”
I’m open to discussion on this.
Since I have my doubts that it’s unconstitutional, please explain to me in some detail your opinion of how exactly the actions of the school are “patently” unconstitutional.
“Since I have my doubts that it’s unconstitutional, please explain to me in some detail your opinion of how exactly the actions of the school are “patently” unconstitutional.”
If I may,
One reason why it may be unconstitutional is the school’s requirement that if she wants to inform students of an alternative she MUST also include the very thing she’s not advocating for. She’s being compelled to include something she’s not legally required to include in her advocacy.
In essence the school, a public government entity, is telling her to include something she shouldn’t be required to include. It falls under the definition of compelled speech. The Supreme Court has found that government cannot compel speech under the umbrella of the 1st amendment.
Turley used another case, erroneously, to point out why government cannot compel speech. That case involves a business. This case involves a student acting in an individual capacity.
Steve,
The Substantial Disruption Test from Tinker requires “the forbidden conduct [to] materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school” for the prohibition to be upheld.
Distributing anti-milk pamphlets in the halls of a school is hardly as disruptive as anti-war armbands, which were worn in class during the Vietnam War.
The substance of the content is irrelevant to the First Amendment question, as is the question of whether the school must accommodate a student’s request for dairy alternatives.
That being said, if a student has a documented disability, prohibiting her from dairy consumption, the school is required by USDA regulations and IDEA/ADA (when the child has an IEP or 504 Plan) to offer reasonable accommodations. In this context, I would presume water is sufficient. But, when cheese pizza is served, for example, a non-diary food alternative is required. (Again, this is a separate issue from the First Amendment suit, but I am responding to it as well given your conflation of the issues.)
SW:
Well I could give you an hour of my time or you could just read an acknowledged Constitutional scholar’s well-grounded argument in the article above. Look for phrases like “compelled speech,” “prior restraint.” “content bias,” and all the other buzz words we lawyer use to say “School Man Bad.”
Also, maybe go ask anybody on the street if they believe compelling someone to say something they don’t want to say is Constitutional or American or anything other than downright stupid.
Witherspoon, schools don’t have the luxury of altering their menus to include an alternative to milk. They are always limited by budget requirements and state laws that make such a simple change impossible. It’s not as easy as you think it is.
“Could they have just told the student that the event was not approved, you bet. There’s lot’s of could of, should of, would of hindsight to be had with this one, starting with the student’s initial demand of the school all the way through to the school making an arbitrary new rule to specifically control the actions of one particular student for one possible event.”
All she wanted to do is advocate for an alternative. That alone shouldn’t have been an issue at all. There could be a lot more students who would have benefited from her suggestion, not just her. We don’t know how many more students would have also preferred the alternative. Maybe she should have made an effort to ask all her friends how many preferred alternatives to milk. Turley notes that even the milk industry deliberately discourages alternatives including water. They clearly want a captive market that benefits only their product. That is not really a “free market” ideal, right?
How isn’t this being argued as a free market issue? Let the free market decide what it best for the students without the limitations imposed by the dairy industry or any other industry for that matter. No?
Fourth sentence starts with a typo, Williamson is mis-spelled William on.
If we start proofreading and nit picking we will have time for nothing else.
That might be better.