FYI readers - I realize I lost a few followers over this one! Don't leave; there's a follow-up to this that is much more interesting. Feel free to argue with me in the comments, though, I like the attention!!
My comment was actually directed to Tom about his response to your post. He said everyone on both sides needs to calm down (or something similar). I wanted to know what he meant by that. Because I took it in a way that seems like he was telling you that and I think your post was salient and relevant and that your anger about how this case is being used for Horton’s self promotion is justified.
I find it interesting that not one newspaper/org has called Horton out on any of this directly. He’s like the Music Man, convincing us we have all these horrible problems that only he can fix and then proudly showing us the band instruments he bought (with our money) we don’t need and can’t play. Then someone mentions the words “But, Equity!”, and we forget to be mad about the con in the first place.
I will say this. We live in very heated political times thanks to Mr. Make America Great Again among other factors. A little over 20 years ago, Ken Starr taught a very reputable course at NYU Law - my friend in my MBA program was getting a joint MBA/JD and she was in it and I never once thought 'oh geez, why the heck has my liberal university hired this guy'. He was not known as someone super partisan then, not Newt level. I am guessing Ms. Deemars took whatever representation she could. She was pissed.
I am an attorney but certainly not an expert in this area. There are several cases throughout the country testing anti-racist curricula and DEI policies against the constitution. I don't know if I can upload a pdf to this comment, so I'll email you an article that lays out the legal framework. The thing is - this isn't a case of one teacher expressing a political opinion and another finding it offensive. This is government action and government can't discriminate on the basis of protected categories (race, sex, etc.) unless it passes a rigorous test. I don't know that the plaintiff clears the bar (so to speak) for D65 action to constitute discrimination. I don't like our taxpayer dollars being spent on lawyers. Would you feel differently if she was represented by ACLU?
I have no opinion on the Deemar case other than she is free to file suit if she feels she was wronged by her employer.
I do think that it is pretty shameful how the Superintendent used it in a dishonest way to cement his victimization.
As you mention above, the Deemar complaint was filed on June 29, 2021.
On July 10, 2021 Horton releases a statement that says: “Surrounding the polarizing media coverage of the lawsuit and its characterization of our District, Superintendent Horton received two voice messages containing racial slurs and threats of bodily harm and his car window was broken while parked in a District lot by what appeared to be an intentional act of vandalism.”
The "intentional act of vandalism" that happened "surrounding media coverage of the lawsuit," however, occurred on June 21, 2021, more than a week before the lawsuit was even filed. The police report makes no mention of any link to policies of the District.
I don't countenance any harassment of any official for doing their job, but his statement about the car break-in was such a gross mischaracterization that it makes it very hard to believe anything coming out of the district administration.
FYI readers - I realize I lost a few followers over this one! Don't leave; there's a follow-up to this that is much more interesting. Feel free to argue with me in the comments, though, I like the attention!!
Hey Randy,
My comment was actually directed to Tom about his response to your post. He said everyone on both sides needs to calm down (or something similar). I wanted to know what he meant by that. Because I took it in a way that seems like he was telling you that and I think your post was salient and relevant and that your anger about how this case is being used for Horton’s self promotion is justified.
I find it interesting that not one newspaper/org has called Horton out on any of this directly. He’s like the Music Man, convincing us we have all these horrible problems that only he can fix and then proudly showing us the band instruments he bought (with our money) we don’t need and can’t play. Then someone mentions the words “But, Equity!”, and we forget to be mad about the con in the first place.
I will say this. We live in very heated political times thanks to Mr. Make America Great Again among other factors. A little over 20 years ago, Ken Starr taught a very reputable course at NYU Law - my friend in my MBA program was getting a joint MBA/JD and she was in it and I never once thought 'oh geez, why the heck has my liberal university hired this guy'. He was not known as someone super partisan then, not Newt level. I am guessing Ms. Deemars took whatever representation she could. She was pissed.
I am an attorney but certainly not an expert in this area. There are several cases throughout the country testing anti-racist curricula and DEI policies against the constitution. I don't know if I can upload a pdf to this comment, so I'll email you an article that lays out the legal framework. The thing is - this isn't a case of one teacher expressing a political opinion and another finding it offensive. This is government action and government can't discriminate on the basis of protected categories (race, sex, etc.) unless it passes a rigorous test. I don't know that the plaintiff clears the bar (so to speak) for D65 action to constitute discrimination. I don't like our taxpayer dollars being spent on lawyers. Would you feel differently if she was represented by ACLU?
I have no opinion on the Deemar case other than she is free to file suit if she feels she was wronged by her employer.
I do think that it is pretty shameful how the Superintendent used it in a dishonest way to cement his victimization.
As you mention above, the Deemar complaint was filed on June 29, 2021.
On July 10, 2021 Horton releases a statement that says: “Surrounding the polarizing media coverage of the lawsuit and its characterization of our District, Superintendent Horton received two voice messages containing racial slurs and threats of bodily harm and his car window was broken while parked in a District lot by what appeared to be an intentional act of vandalism.”
The "intentional act of vandalism" that happened "surrounding media coverage of the lawsuit," however, occurred on June 21, 2021, more than a week before the lawsuit was even filed. The police report makes no mention of any link to policies of the District.
I don't countenance any harassment of any official for doing their job, but his statement about the car break-in was such a gross mischaracterization that it makes it very hard to believe anything coming out of the district administration.
Evanston Now posted the police reports:
https://evanstonnow.com/d65-got-offensive-messages-few-seen-as-threats/