▲ | Levitz 3 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aren't public schools part of government? This looks like a bizarre state of affairs to me if the government can't regulate speech from the government. Say someone in the police department takes the public stance, as a police officer, that black people are subhuman degenerates, is any pushback from the government a first amendment issue? Note this is an ideological stance and doesn't involve any of their duties. EDIT: I should have done better than to comment this without the very relevant input from the article. Better late than never I guess: >A second key component of this ruling is on whether or not regulating books in school libraries constituted “government speech.” Officials for the state argued that they were empowered to make decisions about the materials in those collections because it constituted “government speech” and thus, was not subject to the First Amendment. >Judge Mendoza disagreed. >“*A blanket content-based prohibition on materials, rather than one based on individualized curation, hardly expresses any intentional government message at all.* Slapping the label of government speech on book removals only serves to stifle the disfavored viewpoints,” he wrote. While parents have the right to object to “direct the upbringing and education of children,” the government cannot then “repackage their speech and pass it off as its own.” Emphasis mine. This is frankly even weirder to me. If the government made a blanket, content-based prohibition of any material with a black character, that wouldn't express any intentional government message at all? Really? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | epistasis 3 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stocking a book in a library is not speech from the government. If it were, we couldn't have religious books in school libraries, but we do. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|