"That is because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that students have the same First Amendment

[elleng]

rights as anyone else in school libraries, and removing books based on content is unconstitutional censorship. Writing for the majority in that 1982 case, Board of Education v. Pico, Justice William J. Brennan Jr. concluded that school officials may not exercise their discretion to remove books based on "narrowly partisan or political grounds," because that would amount to an "official suppression of ideas."

[Skittles]

1. suppression of ideas is exactly what repukes have in mind

heaven forbid kids learn the truth

[multigraincracker]

2. They claim to be

Constitutionalist. Until they aren't.

[Skittles]

3. they stand for NOTHING good

racism, sexism, xenophobia - they THRIVE on hatred and fear

repukes are finding their usual racist schtick doesn't resonate in the burbs like it used to, because many of us pearly white folk have been living in very diverse neighborhoods for some time now, and WE AIN'T SCARED, WE LIKE IT....so they are having to go deeper and work on the kids....it is some fucked up SHIT

[2naSalit]

6. Or learn...

To think for themselves.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. Bookmarking. Thanks for posting. . . nt

[bucolic_frolic]

5. They'll just do it anyway and call it moral or tranquil instead of partisan or political

That will buy them 15 more years of litigation because progressive or liberal issues are never fast-tracked at SCOTUS.

[stopdiggin]

7. unfortunately

"narrowly partisan or political grounds," doesn't offer much protection (even today) for much in the area of social justice - LGBTQ, gay marriage, criminal justice and race, CRT (although I hesitate to add the last, because it hasn't really even been approached on a high school or public school level).

This is still very much an ongoing battle - and if you've taken any look at what our school boards look like today ...

[crickets]

8. Thank you. K&R for visibility.