District Court Judge David Carter delivered a crushing blow against free speech rights in elementary schools in an outrageous case out of Orange County. Principal Jesus Becerra at Viejo Elementary punished a seven-year-old girl named B.B. in the lawsuit for writing “any life” under a “Black Lives Matter” picture. Judge Carter issued a sweeping decision that said that she has no free speech rights in the matter due to her age and that the school is allowed to engage in raw censorship. He is now being appealed.
The message from the school seems to be that black lives matter but free speech does not. The school found a kindred spirit in Judge David Carter.
After a lesson on Martin Luther King and Black Lives Matter, B.B. gave her picture to a friend, believing the inclusive image of four shapes of different races and the words would be comforting to a friend. However, when that child showed the picture to a parent, a complaint was filed that B.B.’s picture was insensitive and offensive. Becerra responded by disciplining the child for her inclusive picture.
Becerra should be fired, but his extreme views and lack of judgment is hardly unique in education. The far greater damage was created by Carter’s opinion.
Judge Carter ruled that B.B. has no free speech to protect due to her age, but that “students have the right to be free from speech that denigrates their race while at school.”
Judge Carter added that “an elementary school … is not a marketplace of ideas… Thus, the downside of regulating speech there is not as significant as it is in high schools, where students are approaching voting age and controversial speech could spark conducive conversation.”
The court leaves a vacuum of protected rights that he fills with what seems unchecked authority for the school: “a parent might second-guess (the principal’s) conclusion, but his decision to discipline B.B. belongs to him, not the federal courts.”
The Pacific Legal Foundation, has now filed a petition with the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Chelsea Boyle and her child, B.B.
In my view, Judge Carter is dead wrong, though I expect he will find support among some of the judges on the Ninth Circuit.
The Court applies the famous ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969), as a license for sweeping censorship and discipline. Yet, the Court held in Tinker that students have free speech rights and that any restrictions require evidence of “interference, actual or nascent, with the schools’ work or collision with the rights of other students to be secure and to be let alone.” It then imposes a high standard that it must “materially disrupt[] classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others.” This disruption must be “caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.”
However, what is more disturbing is the disconnection of the right from anything but a narrow functionalist view of free speech. In my new book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I criticize the functionalist approaches that tie the protection of free speech to its function in advancing a democracy.
I argue for a return to the view of free speech as a natural or human right — a view that was popular at the beginning of our Republic but soon lost to functionalist rationales. Those rationales allow for the type of endless trade-offs evident in the Carter decision.
Carter’s functionalist or instrumentalist approach makes it easier to simply discard any free speech rights in elementary students. In my view, they have free speech rights as human beings as do their parents. Under Carter’s approach, schools can engage in a wide array of indoctrination by declaring opposing political and social views to be “disruptive.”
Ironically, my book criticizes Judge Carter in another case over his failure to consider free speech concerns. In his decision in the January 6th case involving John Eastman, Carter dismisses his arguments that he had a right to present his novel theory against certification of the election.
While many of us disagreed with Eastman, there was a concern over efforts to strip lawyers of their bar licenses and even use criminal charges against such figures. However, what concerned me the most was sweeping language used by Carter in his decision.
Carter’s narrow view of free speech and his expansive view of state authority is hardly unique. B.B. is devoid of free speech protections even in this outrageously abusive case. The reason is that she is not of an age where her speech is viewed as worthy of protection. It is an example of the distortive and corrosive effect of functionalism in free speech jurisprudence in my view.
Time
USA Today
Vox
New York Times
Media-ite
All had articles this week claiming that Kamala was never the “border czar”.
Out of the blue.
Nah, there’s no collusion in our media.
It is fun watching the left make fools of themselves.
April 2021 Center for Immigration studies.
What Is ‘Border Czar’ Kamala Harris Doing on the Border Crisis?
Feb 2022
WASHINGTON — Today, Representative Ronny Jackson (TX-13) introduced the Border Czar Accountability Act of 2022, which will force “Border Czar” Kamala Harris to do her job and visit our southern border rather than dismiss and ignore the worst border crisis in American history.
The Border Czar Accountability Act will require any Cabinet member appointed by the President to lead efforts related to immigration or securing the U.S.-Mexico Border to visit the border every 60 days. It also requires the Cabinet Member(s) to submit a report to the President and Congress no later than 15 days after each visit, explaining their findings and outlining solutions for improving the security and situation at the southern border. If the report is not submitted, then no federal funds will be given or expended to immigration efforts led by that Cabinet Member.
Published May 23, 2022, 6:27 p.m. ET
Harris has abandoned ‘border czar’ role — will anyone remedy Biden’s disaster?
AP 2023
Biden taps VP Harris to lead response to border challenges
Whe was not a “border czar”. That term was given to her by Repos.
She was charged with helming diplomatic efforts to address the root causes of migration from Central America to the U.S. Specifically El Salvator, Guatemala, Honduras. And indeed, in the past 3 years crossings from people from those countries have gone down.
Facts matter.
Facts matter, you are correct. But wait!, Here’s a compilation of all the left-wing MEDIA persons labeling her border czar as far back as 2021
https://x.com/Banned_Bill/status/1816201597929574614
Should we show all the right wing media links that call trump a Felon?
Or JD a misogynist racist?
Yea show em big mouth
@Anonymous
No, that was a title and an obligation given to her, quite publicly, by the President, Joe Biden. And it was absolutely celebrated by the media at the time. Nice try, though. And really: it doesn’t matter who the dems put into place, we all know, because they’ve told us, that the country is being overseen by a ‘team’. You are ridiculous and convince no one of anything of consequence.
James,
Well said.
And, no matter what label they want to put on her, she failed. And still is failing. The status quo of the Biden/Harris admin, FAIL!
UpstateFarmer-Agree. Maybe no one told Kamala she was the Border Czar, you know she did not get the memo. Just like WH Staff and Campaign Staff did not know about the withdrawal until they saw the tweet.
Or maybe she forgot where the border was located.
No she did not fail. She was assigned to look into migrants from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Guatemala. In the past 3 years the number of migrants from those 3 countries is reduced.
Now if you consider reducing the number of migrants a success, she succeeded.
Learn to research some facts.
Please pick out the “3 countries” you identify in your statement, “Guatemala, El Salvador, and Guatemala.”
You must work for Kamala.
What exactly did she do that caused that reduction, dum dum?
Now if you consider reducing the number of migrants a success, she succeeded.
Anonymous Soviet Democrats claim getting record numbers of Illegal Aliens across the southern border into the USA ‘success’. Or they’re just Lyin’ Like A Proud Biden.
The lie starts with the Soviet Democrat lie that Illegal Aliens are actually ‘migrants’ – like the geese crapping on your child’s playground lawn, in a few months they will migrate and leave to go somewhere else. They are here permanently if the Soviet Democrats can make that happen. These Illegal Aliens are Guest Democrat Voters, invited here to become a permanent government dependent welfare voter class for the Soviet Democrats:
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/02/15/migrant-encounters-at-the-us-mexico-border-hit-a-record-high-at-the-end-of-2023/
The U.S. Border Patrol had nearly 250,000 encounters with migrants crossing into the United States from Mexico in December 2023, according to government statistics. That was the highest monthly total on record, easily eclipsing the previous peak of about 224,000 encounters in May 2022.
That’s using US Border Patrol statistics. Statistics that Biden/Harris have changed the definition of since coming into power to minimize the number displayed. One example of minimization: the Illegal Aliens directly flown into the USA from outside the country are not counted as “border encounters”. The ones who report to Border Patrol with a pre-authorized “migrant number” obtained from the Border Czar’s authorized iPhone app are not counted as “border encounters” – they had an appointment and authorization.
BTW, here’s how you can put an end to being forced to hide in the shadows as an Anonymous Soviet Democrat Liar, quaking in fear of posting with a username:
Signed,
Old Airborne Dog
Your move…
James is a lier. She was not called the czar by the President. She was given the assignment concerning El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. And she succeded.
Please show. link where Biden called Kamala a “Border Czar”
Otherwise, you are a lier.
Its spelled liar you retard
Cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat Useful Idiot: Whe was not a “border czar”. That term was given to her by Repos.
Soviet Democrat cowards trying to retcon recent history – hoping nobody noticed their party’s official propagandists, the Mainstream Media Marxists, were the ones who ensured “Border Czar” would be permanently stabled to Cackle Harris’ ample ass.
But that was back when they believed normal Americans would love 10+ MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS allowed in the country and 100,000 dead Americans each year. Now that Illegal Alien Guest Democrat Voters are political poison, as are their politicians who made it possible, history must be changed to claim it was actually Republicans who named VP Cackles the ‘border czar”.
Next the Anonymous cowards will be trying to convince us that Pedo Joe, The racist In Chief, didn’t specifically say he would only consider a black Birthing Person to be his fellow VP candidate. Any American who was Asian, Indian, Native Indian, Filipino and especially white was automatically disqualified on the basis of their race.
BTW, cowardly Anonymous… this is how you can free yourself from being forced to be Anonymous, quivering while hidden in the shadows:
Signed,
Old Airborne Dog.
Until and unless she assumes the throne, I think Kamala will remain the blowjob czarevna. By all accounts she’s superior to Hillary in that regard.
Do a google search facts matter there are PLENTY of examples of MSM calling her the border czar.
Axios says she wasnt the border czar.
Axios called her the border czar.
“Whe [sic] was not a ‘border czar.”
You’re right. My apologies.
She was the border Czarina.
You missed the article on Fox news
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jeffries-says-republicans-making-up-kamala-harris-border-czar-title
Even they admit Biden never named her a “border Czar”
She was the border czar. Eat your peas.
An Anonymous Soviet Democrat Liar claimed that Fox News admitted Biden never named her the Border Czar:
You missed the article on Fox news… Even they admit Biden never named her a “border Czar”
Going to that link you foolishly supplied, it becomes evident that you lied with that claim about what Fox News said. The tip-off is that the article is about what Soviet Democrat House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries lied – Jeffries being one of the Soviet Democrat Commissars who along with Commissar Pelosi stabbed Biden in the back as part of the Soviet Democrat party putsch to undemocratically force Harris on party members without a vote. From the article you linked to (and don’t lie to us you actually read Fox to get those links, they’re fed to you):
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries accused Republicans of “making up” that title of “border czar” in reference to Vice President Kamala Harris, just before six members of his House Democratic Caucus voted to condemn her handling of the migrant crisis.
“She was never assigned the position of border czar. They’re making that up, because the extreme MAGA Republicans are in a full meltdown.”
Democrats and mainstream media outlets, in response, have claimed that Harris was never given the title of”border czar” – including Axios, which referred to her that way in April 2021.
So, clearly you lied with your claim Fox News agreed with you. And CNN was also celebrating Biden appointing Harris as the Border Czar the one time she ventured kind of close to the border.
In June of 2021, CNN senior national correspondent Ed Lavandera repeated the framing of Harris as border czar: The Vice President is expected to land in El Paso in about an hour and a half… and this will be her first visit to the U.S.-Mexico border region since she was appointed as the border czar by President Biden.
Soviet Democrat Minority Leader and ultra far left Marxist Hakeem Jeffries also lied to YOU (we don’t believe a word coming from his lying mouth) that it’s Republicans that are melting down regarding Harris being referred to as “Border Czar”.
It isn’t Republicans that are melting down and wailing “false” when Biden’s selected Border Czar is going to have to run with her record of abject failure on the invasion of 10+ MILLION Illegal Aliens who came here by invitation.
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2024/07/24/orwellian-media-try-purge-record-kamala-harris-joe-bidens
Regardless of whether you succeed on your “Border Czar” meltdown, Biden put her in charge of the invasion of Illegal Aliens he invited to the USA during the Biden/Harris 2020 campaign – and now she owns that.
BTW, here’s how you can end being forced to hide in the shadows as an Anonymous Soviet Democrat Liar, quaking in fear at the idea of having an identifying username:
Signed,
Old Airborne Dog
All had articles this week claiming that Kamala was never the “border czar”. Out of the blue.
Almost like it’s coordinated and a directive straight from the Biden/Harris administration that has been Obama’s Third Term, hoping to continue as Obama’s Fourth term?
A directive to attack what they fear as a dangerous threat to their chosen candidate put in place with a coup, the attack to be launched by the propaganda arm of the Soviet Democrat party?
So, let me get this straight: A seven year old in California has no free speech rights in elementary but has the right to choose their “preferred pronouns” to be used in school without parental consent?
Carter seems to be featured in a large number of bad decisions.
I would note that Eastman ultimately prevailed in California, and he has prevailed in ALL final judgements thus far.
There are some facts that are unclear or missing.
As best as I can tell the student added all lives matter to a picture the school provided.
If that is correct – this is not a censorship problem so much as a schools engaging in political advocacy problem.
Public schools can not advocate for a political viewpoint. There is no free speech right for government.
As Turley notes – Free speech is a natural human right. Not a government right.
Government engaging in political speech is a violation of the First amendment.
“ There is no free speech right for government.”
Apparently that is not true according to a Florida school district.
“ Florida’s government is arguing that school districts have a First Amendment right to remove LGBTQ books.”
They argue government has free speech rights.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/12/04/school-libraries-lgbtq-florida-book-ban-government-speech/71801138007/
The state is arguing that the government’s banning of books is protected government speech.
“ Government engaging in political speech is a violation of the First amendment.”
I argue that the constitution says nothing of government not having a free speech rights. How would government be violating the first amendment by exercising speech?
George quoted: Florida’s government is arguing that school districts have a First Amendment right to remove LGBTQ books.
George missed another part of that article – or deliberately left it out: The defendants, meanwhile, say school library content decisions can’t infringe on the First Amendment — because they’re protected by it.
Who gets to define what Alphabet Sex books are and aren’t? Asking as somebody who has lots of younger nephews and nieces that are now parents with children in unionized public schools.
Do school boards elected by the area’s parents have a right to decide that they have a right to remove Hustler Magazine from school libraries used by children who still believe in Santa Clause? Lots of cunnilingus and fellatio on display in that informative magazine. Is that LGBTQ?
How about having IT staff prohibit computers in school libraries from accessing websites like PornHub? Apparently there is LOTS of homosexual content of the self-identifying male and self-identifying female persuasion to be viewed there? That LGBTQ?
How about a book that was the launch for some of this: Gender Queer? Graphic panels showing one young boy giving another boy a blowjob while teaching him how to do that.
Really not much different than Hustler Magazine or Pornhub – just in comic format.
In relation to this principle claiming a right to punish a seven year old for daring to write “all lives matter” on Black Liars & Marxists propaganda in schools, how is the USA Today article you referred to related?
Somewhat off topic, do Kamala Harris and other Soviet Democrats screeching about “book bans” on what is available in school kiddies libraries also claim the books they label as “hate speech” must also be in those school libraries?
Right there beside Gender Queer teaching boys that aren’t quite in their teens how to give and receive blowjobs?
What should be basic common sense regarding teacher conduct and parents having a say in what books should be in their kiddies school libraries has become a twisted battle of legal semantics with people on one side demanding that prepubescent children must be given access to books like Gender Queer and Hustler Magazine.
What law specifically states that government does not have free speech rights? The constitution does not say it. No law that I know of states government is prohibited from having a right to free speech.
I am appalled that this case even got to the courts. This is such a trivial situation that should have been handled at the school. The fact that the mother did not know about BB’s punishment one year afterwards is outrageous so I understand her frustration. But the school principal and the school district are really at fault for a marked lack of common sense and unwillingness to be forthright with the mother. We really need some level of school choice where the allocated tax dollars follow the student as long as the state mandated education standards are met. Then school principals will treat the parents as customers and partners for the child’s education rather than a nuisance and distraction. (For examples of the power of market forces at play in difficult fields consider how competitive maternity centers and LASIK eye surgery have become.)
@Arnold
I think so, too. The levels of absurdity the modern left have achieved would have been straight parody just ten years ago. Says a lot about the constituency, IMO. 🤷🏻♂️ Don’t kid yourself that privates or charters are any better, though, or any less of a Ponzi scheme. They aren’t. It’s quite a disaster, and it’s going to be very tough to fix.
Be careful Professor Turley. If Kamala beats Trump, you may face an angry and vengeful David Carter as our country’s Attorney General!
Please. Please keep saying exactly that.
Little could motivate actual liberals like Turley to vote against Harris more.
Little could empower the coming Trump administration to “angry and vengeful” actions.
Do those of you on the left EVER think about what you post ?
If you make politics into litterally war, then you can not expect those you target as enemies to refrain from the same tactics you use.
If you threaten Angry and Vengeful AG’s – you should expect that when you lose – republicans will deliver angry and vengeful AG’s.
I always find it fascinating that those of you on the left never expect to live under the conditions you seek to impose on others.
You do not understand that the most rights you give those you hate the most are the most you can expect to be given yourself.
John say posted I always find it fascinating that those of you on the left never expect to live under the conditions you seek to impose on others.
I like that… but I don’t agree with it. If they actually feared Trump doing exactly to them like they did to him, they would not dare do what they’re doing. They are emboldened that, after almost 12 years of police state fascism, both before and after Trump, and towards others who have nothing to do with Trump, none of the blood on the ground from the lawfare is theirs.
Clinton/Obama/Biden illegally commissioned and paid two foreign spies to write their “Russia Dossier” to help the Clinton campaign take out Trump in 2016. Before leaving office Obama and Biden ordered Comey, McCabe, and their last two AG’s to repeatedly perjure themselves to FISA courts to get counterespionage spy warrants.
And when it failed and he was elected, they watched Trump who had promised he would have Hillary Clinton investigated for her corruption, espionage act violations, and Russia Dossier tell Americans that the Clintons had suffered enough, and they were actually very fine people. In short, he offered a one way olive branch without any conditions whatsoever.
Mueller and his vicious cull Weissman then followed that olive branch. Mueller, who also perjuring himself to those FISA courts about the ‘Russia Dossier’ he knew from day one was a Clinton/Obama campaign project. The dramatic arrests of Roger Stone that looked like a raid on a Mexican drug cartel leader’s home followed; lawyers had their phones and files searched and ransacked during the hunt for Trump.
And Trump did nothing to respond in kind. The Republicans as a party only had a few voices mumble meekly in protest. Soviet Democrats watched and saw that neither Trump nor Republicans in Congress used what was available to them to strike back.
And then Jack Smith was brought back as an “independent and unbiased” Special Counsel to do a repeat performance of what he did to Governor McDonnell in 2012 to Trump in the 2024 campaign. Republicans in Congress said little to nothing – despite many of them were fully aware of what Jack Smith had done for Obama/Biden in the 2012 election campaign.
If Soviet Democrtats actually believed for a moment they would be dragged out of their homes at oh dark thirty by dozens of FBI agents dressed in full battle rattle with Fox News waiting outside with floodlights and video cameras, they wouldn’t do this.
If they thought Trump and Republicans would find a version of Jack Smith to similarly invent law, go judge shopping, seize their personal cellphones and their lawyers’ cellphones… they would not do what they are doing. If they thought a future Republican president would declare past presidents like Obama and Biden no longer had presidential executive privilege as Biden did to Trump to help his prosecution, they wouldn’t do what they’re doing.
And while this is purely speculation, if any FBI Director appointed by Trump and sent to investigate Biden’s, Schumers, Pelosis, etc uttered false documents similar to the ‘Russia Dossier’ to FISA courts and perjured themselves to those judges as Obama’s FBI did, my belief is that those FISA judges would punish them severely.
Like the stereotypical school yard bully, they do it because they know Trump and the Republicans aren’t going to give them the equivalent of what stops school yard bullies – a good hard punch in the mouth, and a few hard kicks in the balls to follow, resulting in it not being just the bully’s victim whose blood is on the ground.
I don’t advocate for Republicans doing exactly to Soviet Democrats the same police state fascism that Soviet Democrats use. But I am to the point where, support it or not, I think it is the only thing that will put an end to Soviet Democrats using police state fascism as a mechanism to advance to their totalitarian dream of political hegemony in America.
@Trocantor
There’s no way in Hades she ‘beats’ Trump. That seems to matter less and less. I knew something was afoot when Nancy was magnanimous about the assassination attempt, they already had a plan in place, this is it, and they are confident they have nothing to worry about which should perk up ALL of our ears. Just as in the primary of 2020, no one has actually voted for Harris. Delegates are being blocked. The whole thing stinks to high heaven. Many of us really do just want peaceful lives and to be left alone, and that just isn’t possible with the regime the American democratic party has become. It is astonishing to me how many of these elites, even if it isn’t the whole story, have generational communism in their backgrounds, and that this fact is trotted out quite openly these days in bios and wikipedia pages.
And what should that matter, anyway? What is an AG going to do to someone who is merely sharing an analysis without going full fascist? You have missed the point of all of this entirely. Vengeance and keeping others in lock step is all your hateful little hearts seem to know, and that isn’t going to work for anyone.
Page 19 of the Appeal states,
“The district court concluded that M.C.’s right to be let alone was
interfered with because B.B.’s drawing ‘included a phrase similar to ‘All
Lives Matter,’ [B.B. wrote ‘any life’], a phrase ‘that is widely perceived as racially insensitive
and belittling when directed at people of color, ER-14,'”
“widely perceived as racially insensitive and belittling when directed at people of color”
Really? -So you cannot/do not want to teach your kid that ALL life-ANY life matters?
This has reached a level of silly nonsense that I cannot even grasp.
This is typical of left wing nuts.
They mangle language deliberately and then premise that THEIR misreading is widely accepted.
“All Lives Matter” is a negative counter to the implied message of Black Live Matter – the racist part of the Black Lives matter message.
I do not give a flying F$%K what Carter thinks the perceived meaning of something is. That kind of legal reasoning is very dangerous garbage.
While Carter is correct that Kids have extremely limited free speech rights in elementary school.
They ABSOLUTELY have the same free speech rights as other students – and as teachers when Teachers shift from teaching to political indoctrination.
An elementary school can bar political content entirely (constrained by the Tinker decision)
But a school absolutely positively CAN NOT engage in viewpoint based political censorship.
It is All or nothing for any government actor – and especially schools.
“ An elementary school can bar political content entirely (constrained by the Tinker decision)
But a school absolutely positively CAN NOT engage in viewpoint based political censorship.”
That makes no sense. If a child chooses to wear a T-shirt expressing a political view, according to you the school can censor it by demanding the student remove the shirt or go home. But a school cannot engage viewpoint based on political censorship?
If a school deems the viewpoint or expressive material disruptive they can censor it. The “Bong hits for Jesus” case proved schools CAN engage in viewpoint based political censorship as long as they can claim it promotes certain behavior.
Public school is no place for a child
Public school is no place for a child
Unionized but taxpayer funded public schools are no place for a child.
Forbidden Fruit and the Classroom: The Huge American Sex-Abuse Scandal That Educators Scandalously Suppress
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2024/07/10/forbidden_fruit_and_the_classroom_the_huge_american_sex-abuse_scandal_that_educators_scandalously_hush_up_1042969.html
It’s California, did you expect something rational? Cackles with the teachers now.
It’s a pro life poster, anti abortion from the right. Those aren’t people. Those are zygotes after conception.
Love your drawing BB no mater what peeple sae!
Meanwhile — Political Funny Money:
https://rumble.com/v58bxot-where-s-the-democrat-money-coming-from-carl-higbie-frontline.html
go to another school or homeschool, or move
Yes, children are being punished for being Republicans passing off propaganda like any life matters covertly, hand-to-hand to other children.
They’re after your children. What was the punishment? 100x not any lives matter? We know BB isn’t black or brown because she was punished.
Maybe she was spanked. One can only hope so. The nerve of some children. 😝.
The Ninth Circuit was a thorn in the side of the previous administration and I trust will continue to be should the current administration be reputed and swept aside in November.
Sure. Because we don’t have inalienable rights until we’re old enough to vote blue. 🙄🙄 This is absurd, but in CA it’s pretty much the norm outside of the Central Valley or small enclaves.
As others have stated, the humiliation is the kicker. These people are truly not well. It’s a bad decision in a state that crumbles more by the day. I am no fan of J.D. Vance’s politics, but we simply can’t turn the rest of the country into this with four more years of dem rule. We will not survive it. Obama’s fingerprints are all over the last 3.5 years.
Again, something as seemingly trivial as Elon buying Twitter saved us from complete oblivion at the hands of these hose beasts. Two years ago we might not even know and be able to discuss. Make no mistake: the American Pravda is a real thing, and the average leftist really does think you and I are superfluous.
I’ll never forget when BLM protesters attacked Senator Bernie Sanders
I presume BB drew the picture during free time drawing or drew the picture at home? It’s unclear.
BB drew the picture and gave it to a friend to make her friend feel better? The color swatches are all brown and one is orange. Her friend must be a redhead. Her friend was sad about being orange.
What a lovely get well card for her friend. BB is a caring child. Sad that children have been brow beaten into censorship of kindness.
Thank you, Mr. Turley
What a precious get well card for her orange friend. 😔. I love your your little cocoon people , too.
Sweet girl
BB is clearly republican. Becerra and the judge must be democratic.
It’s a pro life card. Right after conception the people are zygotes! All zygotes matter.
Obviously the idea is ONLY black lives matter. It’s fine BB. BB also thinks orange people follow laws.
She has a future at Hallmark.
I do not know if BB was a republican – but I would bet that she and her parents are now, and for life.
As is typical of left wing nuts – you start a long list of mind reading other people.
Jonathan: Fear not; free speech is alive and well in America. Dennis McIntyre’s fellow Soviet Democrats were putting it on display all of yesterday, holding a mini mostly peaceful insurrection in the capitol.
Occupying Union Station by force, assaulting police officers, vandalism, and assaulting an American who grabbed the American flag belonging to the property owners that they were burning. We should be thankful they weren’t similarly mostly peaceful Republicans – then it would have been a danger to democracy and the rule of law, instead of the New American Free Speech.
We know that it was free speech rather than reminiscent of the rioting, pillaging, looting and burning of 2020’s months of mostly peaceful insurrection – Capitol Police didn’t arrest a single anti-Semitic terrorist sympathizer exercising their free speech rights to speak their truth about their hatred of that dirty Jew invited to address Congress.
Meanwhile, the danger to democracy coup within the Soviet Democrat party continued. Kamela Harris in her position of Senate president pro tempore used physical expression of free speech to announce to America that she wants to be president for all anti-Semitic Americans. Rather than presiding over the speech by visiting head of state Benjamin Netanyahu (our only ally in the Middle East against the Mad Mullahs of Iran and their genocidal neo-Nazi terrorists who kill Americans as well as Israelis), Harris instead went to a campaign event elsewhere.
The free speech expression of Soviet Democrat anti-Semitism and support for hajji Muslim terrorism through truancy, did not end with president pro tempore Harris.
Second in succession behind Harris, Soviet Democrat Patty Murray from Washington refused to fulfill her role to substitute for the president pro tempore when that person is available by ALSO refusing to attend. She did not have the excuse of having a campaign event to attend.
The Anti-Semitic Hajji Socialist Sisterhood assigned one member, Rashida Tlaib, to attend dressed in the uniform of hajji terrorists holding a sign to signal their hatred of the dirty Jew speaking. And it didn’t end with these five amazing Birthing Person feminists exercising their free speech right to support hajjis who force women to live in bee keeper suits and murdering the ones who won’t comply. In total, several dozen Soviet Democrat members of the House and Senate exercised their free speech right to signal their hatred of that dirty Jew by refusing to be present for the speech.
All in all, between the free speech mostly peaceful mini insurrection by the Soviet Democrats’ New Hitler Youth movement throughout the capital accompanied by the magnificent anti-Semitic/pro Hamas terrorist group boycott of the speech by that dirty Jew Netanyahu, it was a solid day of somewhat mostly legal free speech!
A solid day for Dennis McIntyre’s Soviet Democrats telling Iran’s Mad Mullahs that if Harris and the Soviet Democrats win the next election, they will continue to have the support and funding of the Soviet Democrats under Harris as they had from Biden and Obama before her. It was so tantalizing: free speech from the Soviet Democrats to anti-Semitic Americans, foreign students, Illegal Alien Guest Democrat Voters and the world at large:
It’s a new day in America for official government anti-Semitism and the New Hitler Youth Movement as the Soviet Democrats continue fundamentally changing America.
“…Carter delivered a crushing blow against free speech rights in elementary schools…” Has Judge Carter not read Tinker?
He is almost as old as Joseph “the courageous one” Biden, and was appointed by Bill Clinton. It is unlikely that reading Tinker nor the US Constitution would change xis/xer/dem mind
Assumed office
October 22, 1998
Appointed by Bill Clinton
Born David Ormon Carter
March 28, 1944 (age 80)
– Wiki
This is the problem with judges on the left
They do not care what the constitution says.
They do not care what the law says
They do not care what precident says.
They do not care about the FACt that history has proven the nonsense they are spewing fails every time.
John Say-this is what the Dems mean by a “Living Consitution” which means to the Dems that they can interpret any way they want. It’s all about the judge and not about what is written.
This is an absolute outrage!
And Judge David O. Carter held that a “punishment” and “retaliation” done secretly against a first grader creating a drawing does not violate the First Amendment? Are you kidding me? What kind of Federal judge makes such a call? Judge Carter need to be removed from the bench.
The school principle and every teacher associated with this case needs to be fired based on child abuse.
The core issue here is NOT whether 1st graders have free speech rights – SOME parts of Carter’s decision are correct regarding the limited free speech rights of elementary students.
The core issue is the violation of the first amendment much more broadly by the school.
The school can not engage in political speech while prohibiting political speech of students.
It is crystal clear from the facts of the case – and from Carters decision that this was NOT handled in a content/viewpoint neutral fashion.
Within the limits of Tinker – and the students conduct appears to fall inside what is protected by Tinker, the school can limit free speech.
But it is still required to do so in a viewpoint neutral fashion.
It can not allow “Black Lives matter” messages without allowing “all lives matter”
A school can not open a political discussion and then constrain the views that can be discussed.
Tinker was about non-disruptive student initiated expression.
A school can not open up a controversial subject without allowing reasonable expression of viewpoints at odds with the schools.
Students are still obligated to avoid being disruptive. But mere disagreement is not disruption.
For that matter, it can’t allow, let alone promote, “black lives matter” without allowing not only “all lives matter” but also “white lives matter”, “blue lives matter”, and even “black lives don’t matter”. All of these are viewpoints which it must treat equally with its own. The only alternative is to ban all such statements, including “black lives matter”.
And yet I imagine he would support her Constitutional right to hormones and other “gender affirming care”.
Any so called right that creates a duty in others – is NOT a right.
There is no right to an abortion, there is no right to healthcare, there is no right to hormones, or gender affirming care.
There is a right to be free from government interferance in free private transactions that cause no harm to anyone beyond those who freely choose them.
You are free to seek the removal of a fetus from your body – if you can do so on your own or persuade others to assist.
There is till no right to kill that fetus should it be able to survive removal.
There is no right to compel others to provide you healthcare. But you are free to seek whatever healthcare you can provide for yourself or freely receive from others.
There is no more right to hormones or gender affirming care than to healthcare.
But you are free to inject yourself with whatever you can provide for yourself or get others to provide for you.
“ There is a right to be free from government interferance in free private transactions that cause no harm to anyone beyond those who freely choose them.”
That would make laws banning and criminalizing transgender care for minors by parents and doctors freely engaging in a private decision between the two. Same goes for abortion.
Based on what you said. Those laws should be unconstitutional.
Abortion thru the use of abortion pills should be free from government interference.
The libertarian view is/should be that all drugs should be legal because it’s up to the individual to choose whether to use them as they see fit.
George lied: That would make laws banning and criminalizing transgender care for minors by parents and doctors freely engaging in a private decision between the two. Same goes for abortion.
Why do you Soviet Democrats lie your asses off that the Republican Party intends to ban abortion? No matter how many times they say verbally and in writing that they don’t?
It is telling you don’t provide quotes of Trump saying he wants to ban abortions. It’s telling you can’t produce a quote from the Republican election campaign platform. Trump has repeatedly said he agrees with what SCOTUS affirmed: decisions on elective birth control abortions are to be made by state legislatures, not federal political parties.
Why can’t you just campaign on the Soviet Democrat demand that there must be a Federal government privilege for elective birth control abortions right up to the moment of birth – despite what the Dobbs decision found? Because Senator/Pastor Ralph Warnock tried it once and it failed miserably?
And to use a funny/not funny example, if a child convinces their parents that she wants to be a one eyed, peg legged pirate with a hook, should those amputations be legal if they can find a surgeon who agrees to do that?
Or maybe just if that child only wants one of her hands amputated?
How about parents who tell doctors that they and their very ill child do not want the blood transfusion that is necessary to save the child’s life because they’re afraid that the child might get dirty Jew blood? That would also be parents and doctors freely engaging in a private decision between the two?
What the hell… kid wants to join the army and the parents are all in on that and want the kid to have an AK-47 and a .338 Lapua Magnum sniper rifle despite only being 14. Surely that’s “just care for minors by parents and doctors freely engaging in a private decision between the two.”
As Kamala Harris famously said “Young people are stupid, and make stupid decisions, that’s why we protect them from their decisions”.
You can say the same about Soviet Democrats – especially when they lie their asses off about elective birth control abortions at the federal government level.