Some of us in the free speech community have been writing about the hypocrisy of many in the media and academia suddenly championing free speech values after years of silence (or support) over censorship of conservatives, libertarians, and contrarians. A good example can be found in the Chicago area, where a physical education teacher is on administrative leave and faces possible termination after posting two words (“Go ICE”) on Facebook in support of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Local leaders and groups are demanding that he be fired, even though a posting opposing ICE would likely have been heralded rather than condemned.
Social media exploded with commentators calling the teacher a “f****** piece of s***.” A flyer demanded termination because any expression of support for ICE is “inappropriate and unsuitable for an educator.” The flyer insisted that “keeping this teacher will disrupt the emotional welfare and therefore, the education of our students.”
Local Democratic leaders immediately joined the mob. That includes Karina Villa, who posted a message saying she stands in “unwavering solidarity” with those demanding action given the “disturbing comments reportedly made by an educator.”
As is often the case, Villa did the perfunctory nod toward the right to free speech before joining the effort to gut it. She acknowledged the right, but noted that “as educators we have the responsibility to our students and their families to create a safe and welcoming environment for all.”
According to the district’s superintendent, Kristina Davis, the unnamed teacher submitted a resignation on Friday but then withdrew that resignation before the board could approve it. She then suspended the teacher pending an investigation.
That “investigation” concerns the posting of two words in favor of law enforcement outside the school on a personal social media account.
In the meantime, Mayor Daniel Bovey and the city council of West Chicago held a “listening session” on Monday to address the trauma of having a teacher who openly supports ICE. The District also addressed what it called the “disruption for students, families, and staff” and assured families that “our schools are safe spaces.”
Once again, the teacher simply wrote “Go Ice” on a personal social media account.
Notably, the nearby Chicago Teachers’ Union is one of the most radical and politically active in the country. Members have publicly voiced support for the Venezuelan regime and have engaged in violent public declarations against the Administration.
I think Tom Homan, Secretary Noem, and Greg Bovino should speed right on over to West Chicago. If they are so adamant about protecting their illegal voters, they must be overrun with them and need help cleaning them out.
Some, if not all, of the school board members are guilty of deprivation of civil rights under color of law. Harsh punishment, both civil and criminal, is required to put an end to such fascist nonsense.
I wonder what the school’s response would be if a teacher posted “Protect Migrant Child Rapists and Traffickers from ICE” on their private social media account.
With all the tools in the government’s hands, why is it so often private individuals with abundant brains and courage who discover the rot?
https://xcancel.com/DataRepublican/status/2015620564787105892
Would we know anything without them? I suspect much of the FBI is still useless by comparison.
Thank God and the Founders for these dedicated private folks and the First Amendment that allows their work to see light.
No wonder scoundrels want to silence them.
The teacher wants the First Amendment right to encourage agents of the government to go on violating the First Amendment rights of American citizens. That makes perfect sense.
If what happened on January 6 is the First Amendment in action, then so is the protesting in Minneapolis.
Can you identify ANYONE who is claiming that you can not protest ICE ?
Protest all you want. But while protesting Obey laws that the courts long ago found are NOT infringments on your first amendment rights.
You may NOT protest on private property. PERIOD.
You are ALWAYS obligated to obey all other viewpoint neutral laws while protesting.
You can not as an example march down the street protesting without a permit.
You can not disrupt traffic
You can not obstruct law enforcement.
You can not ram people with your car.
You can not assault others.
You can not trow rocks or frozen water bottles at people.
You can not try to blind people with lasers
You can not throw molatov cocktails.
You can not fire fireworks at people.
All of the above and many more are done all the time by left wing “protestors”
You are not protected from the consequences of illegal actions by virtue of protesting.
Assuming – falsely that J6 protestors went to the capital to protest to demand that Trump be made King – as opposed to what they actually did which was demand that congress refuce to certify a lawless and fraudulent election.
Protesting to demand that government not Follow the law or constitution is legal.
J6 Protestors can demand that Trump be made King.
ICE protestors can demand that ICE refuse to enforce the law.
NEITHER may violate viewpoint neutral laws while protesting
You may NOT protest on private property.
J6 protesters were not on private property they were protesting in the pre-eminent government created forum for free speech in the world.
ICE protesters trespassed on a church.
You can not as an example march down the street protesting without a permit.
J6 protestors had permits.
ICE protestors did not.
You can not disrupt traffic,
J6 protesters did not
ICE protesters did.
you can not obstruct law enforcement.
J6 protesters did not
ICE protesters did.
You can not ram people with your car.
J6 protesters did not
ICE protesters did.
You can not assault others.
There was some of that at J6 and had the Biden DOJ not violated the rights of thousands
those people likely would have been prosecuted and not pardoned.,
But the Kangaroo courts in DC either required new trials or made retrial impossible.
Pretti, Good and innumerable others in MN assaulted LEOs
You can not trow rocks or frozen water bottles at people.
J6 protesters did not
ICE protesters did.
You can not try to blind people with lasers
J6 protesters did not
ICE protesters did.
You can not throw molatov cocktails.
J6 protesters did not
ICE protesters did.
You can not fire fireworks at people.
J6 protesters did not
ICE protesters did.
All of the above and many more are done all the time by left wing “protestors”
You are not protected from the consequences of illegal actions by virtue of protesting.
Here’s an idea. Why not make the 4th amendment apply to entire cities, instead of just buildings.
Then there would be no question or doubt about the legitimacy of the presence of ICE agents.
This is reasonable.
No, it’s not reasonable. Go back to GO.
The 4th amendment does not apply to public spaces.
a LEO may detain ANYONE in public on “reasonable suspicion” a standard that is easily met.
The 4th amendment in this instance only applies to private property – homes.
USUALLY a warrant is required to enter a home and seize a person.
A warrant sworn by an ICE officer and issued by an Article II immigration judge is no different from a warrant sworn by another LEO and issued by an Article II magistrate Judge and certainly stronger than one sworn by a local cop and issued by a JP who may not even be a lawyer.