Pages

▼

Saturday, December 16, 2023

No Right to Trans Propagandize Kids in Schools: Florida AG Amicus Brief on Pico and School Libraries

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION

Case No. 3:23-cv-10385-TKW-ZCB


PEN AMERICAN CENTER, INC., ET AL.,

          Plaintiffs,

                    v.

ESCAMBIA COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD,

          Defendant.




INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF INTEREST

     Plaintiffs challenge “the decisions of the Escambia County School Board (‘the School Board’) to remove and restrict” certain materials in “public school libraries within the Escambia County School District.” DE25-1 at 1–2. The restrictions, Plaintiffs say, violate the First Amendment because the government may not restrict access to materials “based on viewpoint” or “deny students access to ideas with which” the “school board disagrees.” DE25-1 ¶¶ 218, 225 (cleaned up). But public-school systems make value-based judgments like that every day. They exclude materials like Nazi propaganda because they disagree that Nazis were wonderful, regardless of any educational value the materials may have. Viewpoint-based educational choices are constitutionally permissible because public-school systems, including their libraries, convey the government’s message, and, when the government speaks, it may “regulate the content of . . . its own message,” Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 833 (1995), “including choosing not to speak and speaking through the removal of speech that the government disapproves,” Gundy v. City of Jacksonville, 50 F.4th 60, 71 (11th Cir. 2022) (cleaned up). Plaintiffs—who include the authors and publishers of certain books restricted by Defendant—are free to take their concerns to the ballot box. See Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460, 468–69 (2009). But they have no constitutional right to inculcate Florida’s schoolchildren with their preferred ideas through Florida’s school libraries. To vindicate that principle, the Attorney General respectfully submits this amicus brief in support of Defendant’s motion to dismiss.

ARGUMENT

I.     PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO STATE A FIRST AMENDMENT CLAIM.

     1.  Plaintiffs contend that “[s]chool libraries are . . . of great importance to book authors and book publishers, especially with regard to books aimed at” their intended audience—“children and young adults.” DE25-1 ¶ 41. In their view, “[t]he libraries within the School District constitute, at a minimum, non-public forums,” and, “[b]ecause they are non-public forums, the School Board cannot” restrict access to materials “based on viewpoint.” Id. ¶ 218. That is wrong because Florida’s public-school libraries are a forum for government, not private, speech. And when the government speaks, it “can freely select the views that it wants to express, including choosing not to speak and speaking through the removal of speech that the government disapproves.” Gundy, 50 F.4th at 71(cleaned up).

     Although the Eleventh Circuit has not yet addressed whether the government’s “book collection (and book removal) decisions” for school libraries are “government speech,” ACLU of Fla., Inc. v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 557 F.3d 1177, 1201 (11th Cir. 2009),[ 1 ] the Supreme Court and Eleventh Circuit have repeatedly held that the government’s authority to “regulate the content of . . . its own message,” Rosenberger, 515 U.S. at 833, includes the discretion to select materials and content for compilation and presentation to citizens, be it a government parade,[ 2 ] a broadcasted debate,[ 3 ] a state-university commencement,[ 4 ] or a state-sponsored art gallery.[ 5 ] In Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, for example, the Supreme Court held that the selection of monuments for a public park was government speech, even when the monuments were funded or donated by private parties. 555 U.S. at 470–73. “Government decisionmakers select[ed] the monuments that portray[ed] what they view[ed] as appropriate for the place in question, taking into account such content-based factors as esthetics, history, and local culture.” Id. at 472. Accordingly, the “decision to accept certain privately donated monuments while rejecting respondent’s” was “government speech,” and the government was not required to “maintain viewpoint neutrality” in making that decision. Id. At 479, 481. 

     As the Supreme Court has explained, “forum analysis and heightened judicial scrutiny . . . are also incompatible with the discretion that [government-run] libraries must have to fulfill their traditional missions.” United States v. Am. Libr. Ass’n, Inc., 539 U.S. 194, 205 (2003) (plurality op.). Like the monument park in Summum, a library’s purpose is “to provide its patrons with materials of requisite and appropriate quality, not to create a public forum for [private parties] to express themselves.” Id. at 209 n.4. “To fulfill their traditional missions, public libraries must have broad discretion to decide what material to provide to their patrons,” and need not “provide universal coverage.” Id. at 201. Like the selection of monuments, “the government speaks through its selection of which books to put on the shelves and which books to exclude,” People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Gittens, 414 F.3d 23, 28 (D.C. Cir. 2005), because that selection reflects the government’s view about what materials have the “requisite and appropriate quality,” Am. Libr. Ass’n, Inc., 539 U.S. at 204, 206 (plurality op.) (citations omitted); see also Bryant v. Gates, 532 F.3d 888, 898 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (Kavanaugh, J., concurring) (the government speaks when it “compil[es]” the “speech of third parties” in a public library). And because the compilation of library materials is government speech, the First Amendment does not bar the government from making viewpoint-based choices about what to curate. See Gittens, 414 F.3d at 29; Am. Libr. Ass’n, 539 U.S. at 204–05 (plurality op.).

     That principle applies with even more force in public-school libraries, the purpose of which is to support the government’s educational mission by “providing materials that properly supplement the basic readings assigned through the standard curriculum.” Zykan v. Warsaw Cmty. Sch. Corp., 631 F.2d 1300, 1308 (7th Cir. 1980). By curating a school library, the government conveys its view on which books have the “requisite and appropriate quality” to bolster student development. Am. Libr. Ass’n, 539 U.S. at 204 (plurality op.) (citation omitted). “Absurd results would follow,” Dean v. Warren, 12 F.4th 1248, 1266 (11th Cir. 2021), if private parties were allowed to hijack the government’s message by forcing their preferred books onto school-library shelves, see Hurley v. Irish-Am. Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Grp. of Bos., Inc., 515 U.S. 557, 572–73 (1995) (parade organizers not required to include voices they wished to exclude); Leake, 14 F.4th at 1253 (same for government parade organizer). Forcing the government “to speak” in a school library “what [it] do[es] not believe on pain of” lawsuit, 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 143 S. Ct. 2298, 2313–14 (2023), would put policy decisions about what to teach in schools in the hands of litigants rather than elected representatives. “Indeed, it is not easy to imagine how government could function if it lacked this freedom.” Summum, 555 U.S. at 468. “If every citizen were to have a right to insist” that his preferred books be included in a school’s library, “debate over issues of great concern to the public would be limited to those in the private sector.” Id. (citing Keller v. State Bar of Cal., 496 U.S. 1, 12–13 (1990)). The government would not only have to curate those litigants’ preferred materials, but also reallocate resources and student attention away from those that advance the government’s selected educational mission. See Mayer v. Monroe Cnty. Cmty. Sch. Corp., 474 F.3d 477, 479 (7th Cir. 2007).

     Plaintiffs make much of Defendant’s professed commitment in its policy manual to provide in school libraries “a wide range of materials of different difficulty levels, with diversity of appeal and representing different points of view.” DE25-1 ¶¶ 39–40 (citing DE25-1 Exh. 1 at 8–9). But the policy manual merely identifies that goal as one among many competing objectives for Defendant’s libraries—among them, “provid[ing] a broad background of information in all areas of knowledge,” “support[ing] the general educational goals of the District and the objectives of specific courses,” and “[s]upport[ing] the professional needs of teachers and administrators.” DE25-1 Exh. 1 at 7–8. If anything, the policy manual confirms that Defendant’s libraries are not a forum for free expression, warning that “[n]o parent, guardian or resident of the county has the right to determine the reading, viewing or listening resources for students other than their own children” and reserving to school officials—not authors, publishers, or students—the authority to “mak[e] the final selection for library-media.” Id. at 9, 12. Far from the blanket “accommodat[ion]” of “all applicants” that reflects a “lack of meaningful involvement in the selection” process and thus creates a forum for free expression, Defendant’s policies show that school officials “always select[]” their library materials and “maintain direct control” of them. Shurtleff v. City of Boston, 142 S. Ct. 1583, 1592–93 (2022) (citing Summum, 555 U.S. at 472–473, and Walker v. Tex. Div., Sons of Confederate Veterans, 576 U.S. 200, 213 (2015)). State law indeed requires as much. See Fla. Stat. § 1006.28(2)(d)(1) (“Each book made available to students through a school district library . . . must be selected by a school district employee . . ., regardless of whether the book is purchased, donated, or otherwise made available to students.”); see also id. § 1006.28(2)(d)(2) (requiring that “[e]ach district school board . . . adopt procedures for developing library . . . collections” to “support . . . state academic standards and aligned curriculum, and the academic needs of students and faculty.”).

     2.  The Student Plaintiffs are just as wrong that the First Amendment bars the government from restricting library books “for the purpose of ‘deny[ing] students access to ideas with which’ the school district disagrees.” DE25-1 ¶ 225 (citing Pico, 457 U.S. at 870–71 (plurality op.). The government has no constitutional obligation to present educational material with which it disagrees. Because a “listener’s right to receive information is reciprocal to the speaker’s right to speak,” Doe ex rel. Doe v. Governor of N.J., 783 F.3d 150, 155 (3d Cir. 2015), that right cannot be deployed to interfere with the government’s own message. Students certainly have no more right to control what the government puts in its libraries than they do to control the content of a school cheer, see Dean, 12 F.4th at 1265–66 (cheerleading is government speech), or the message they communicate while participating in a training practicum, see Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley, 664 F.3d 865, 877 (11th Cir. 2011)(same for school practica).

     In arguing the contrary, Plaintiffs attach considerable significance to Board of  Education v. Pico, in which a plurality of the Supreme Court concluded that school library materials may not be selected “in a narrowly partisan or political manner.” 457 U.S. at 870. But the Eleventh Circuit has recognized that Pico was “a badly fractured decision” that is “of no precedential value as to the application of the First Amendment to these issues” and “establishes no standard.” Miami-Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 557 F.3d at 1199–1200 (quotations omitted). In addition, Pico predates the Supreme Court’s government-speech cases, which—as Justice Rehnquist foreshadowed—would have required a different result in that case. See 457 U.S. at 920 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting) (“[T]he Court will far better serve the cause of First Amendment jurisprudence by candidly recognizing that the role of government as sovereign is subject to [stricter] limitations than [its] role” as “educator.”).

II.     PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO STATE AN EQUAL PROTECTION CLAIM.

     Plaintiffs also claim that “[m]any of these books have been targeted simply because they address themes relating to race, sexuality, or gender identity” and, from that they infer the “intent . . . to exclude speech by authors based on their race, sexuality, or gender identity.” DE25-1 ¶ 236. In other words, Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s governmental message constitutes invidious discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. That claim fails for the same reason as Plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims: “[A] government entity is entitled to say what it wishes and to select the views it wants to express,” with a notable exception for the establishment of religion. Am. Atheists, Inc. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 760 F.3d 227, 246 (2d Cir. 2014) (cleaned up) (rejecting equal protection claim alleging animus in the adoption of the September 11 Memorial at Ground Zero). Accordingly, “the Equal Protection Clause does not apply to government speech.” Fields v. Speaker of Penn. House of Representatives, 936 F.3d 142, 161 (3d Cir. 2019); see Freedom from Religion Found., Inc. v. City of Warren, 707 F.3d 686, 698 (6th Cir. 2013); Bloomberg v. Blocker, 586 F. Supp. 3d 1251, 1258 (M.D. Fla. 2022). That makes sense because, when—as here—the government speaks for itself rather than creating a forum for private speech, it necessarily treats all citizens equally.

CONCLUSION

     For the foregoing reasons, as well as those stated in Defendant’s motion to dismiss, the Court should dismiss all claims against Defendant.

[NOTES]

[ 1 ]  In Miami-Dade County School Board, the court had no occasion to decide that question because the plaintiffs lost even under the “standard . . . of their dreams”—“the standard that failed to attract a majority in the Pico case.” 557 F.3d at 1202 (citing Bd. of Educ., Island Trees Union Free Sch. Dist. No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 872 (1982) (plurality op.)).
[ 2 ]  See Leake v. Drinkard, 14 F.4th 1242, 1253 (11th Cir. 2021).
[ 3 ]  Ark. Educ. Television Comm’n v. Forbes, 523 U.S. 666, 674 (1998).
[ 4 ]  Id.
[ 5 ]  Nat’l Endowment for the Arts v. Finley, 524 U.S. 569, 586 (1998).



                                                  Respectfully submitted,

                                                  ASHLEY MOODY
                                                    Attorney General
                                                  HENRY C. WHITAKER (FBN 1031175)
                                                    Solicitor General
                                                  /s/ Daniel W. Bell    
                                                  DANIEL W. BELL (FBN 1008587)
                                                    Chief Deputy Solicitor General
                                                  DAVID M. COSTELLO (FBN 1004952)
                                                    Deputy Solicitor General

                                                  Counsel for Amicus Curiae the State of Florida

Office of the Attorney General
The Capitol, PL-01
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050
(850) 414-3300
(850) 410-2672 (fax)
daniel.bell@myfloridalegal.com


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

     On this 22nd day of August, 2023, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was filed with the Court’s CM/ECF system, which will provide service to all parties.

                                                  /s/ Daniel W. Bell      
                                                  Chief Deputy Solicitor General



COMMENTS BY SAFELIBRARIES:

Links to cases cited have been added by me for everyone's ease and understanding.

SafeLibraries has written about Miami-Dade County School Board previously, and what a coincidence, another American Library Association "partner" in "Unite Against Book Bans" is back again to gaslight America—meanwhile, notice it's perfectly legal to keep political propaganda out of schools, Cuba then, the "transgender" lies now:
And I love the way Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody used the American Library Association's greatest loss, US v. ALA, 539 US 194 (2003), where ALA spent over a million and a half dollars on a massive loss for ALA and ACLU, against the librarians yet again.  It's the gift that keeps on giving—to parents.  And notice how ALA just keeps plowing ahead with false information that harms school kids.

Then she used the policies of the school itself to argue in favor of dismissal of the case.  Really, a devastating amicus curiae brief for those who want the school kids to keep reading pervasively vulgar and educationally unsuitable material.

So all those books about pronouns and genders and trans rights?  All propaganda, all based on a fiction, also based on some people (especially ALA librarians themselves) trying to push things on kids in public schools using public funding to do so.  All illegal, despite state or federal laws requiring "diversity," "equity," and "inclusion."  All may be removed from public school libraries.  Immediately!  Buh bye!  The question is, will people continue to let ALA, NEA/AFT and ACLU bully them into allowing the harm to continue?


Lastly, for those who don't yet know, much local opposition to efforts by parents to protect children from harm caused by school librarians and school libraries is in reality artificially created with the time and platform and money of the American Library Association itself.  See:
—
at No comments:

Friday, December 15, 2023

Tennessee Walking Horses - TN Parents Astroturfed by ALA Use High Stepping Lies to Overwhelm Rutherford County Library Board; It's an ALA Pattern Nationwide

American Library Association [ALA] creates, funds, fund raises for, and advertises local groups to appear as if they were grassroots.  This is called astroturfing as in fake grass.  In reality, local groups just do what ALA wants.  

In Tennessee, like Tennessee Walking Horses, parents are trained to high step ALA's lie that children have a First Amendment right to anything whatsoever, such as books that guide children how to meet a man for a night using the Grindr app.  They explicitly rely on ALA's "Library Bill of Rights" that makes it age discrimination to keep anything from children, although in all other areas of society children are given limited access, like tattoos, voting, drinking, driving, video games, music, etc.  Then, as trained by ALA such as with Unite Against Book Bans, they claim people oppose homosexuality, not that children are receiving CSAM from public libraries. 

So, in Tennessee, there's the "Rutherford County Library Alliance."  It is an ALA astroturfed organization.  Here's where the astroturfing is documented, and when reading EveryLibrary (and its Fight For the First), know that's just a crypto ALA organization created by and working closely with ALA to do what ALA cannot do directly.  See: Rutherford County Library Alliance.  One of its members, for example, is "TM,"—notice how membership is hidden.  TM is Tasslyn Magnusson, pictured below.  She has her "Book Censorship Database by Dr. Tasslyn Magnusson" prominently displayed at EveryLibrary, with her name even in the URL itself: www.everylibraryinstitute.org/book_censorship_database_magnusson

So it's astroturfed.  Faked grass roots.  Created by ALA.  With one of its own members as a member of a local astroturfed organization, someone who helped create the web site, "Support Teachers CRT Toolkit."  

Is this person's views even known?  Do they represent the local community in Tennessee?  ALA features her in a blog post.  Look what she says, because she's targeting parents groups who oppose the indoctrination of school children by librarians and teachers and decries "censorship":

Tasslyn Magnusson is an educator and a member of children’s literacy organizations who has worked to create the website CRT Toolkit to support educators, parents, and community members who are concerned about misrepresentations and attempts at unjust censorship. 

She said that when googling Critical Race Theory, she found “fear-based ‘toolkits’ for parents to get active at their school boards and in their kids’ classrooms created by organizations with names like Heritage Action for America and Citizens for Renewing America.  And they were very much NOT trying to support educators and books and stories that represented all of American history and diverse stories.  I was astonished by the instructions and detail these toolkits gave to parents—and appalled by the disinformation throughout the kits.”

“I decided if I needed tools—other parents and community members might need them too.”


She's got tools, alright.  And she's turned them against local communities by appearing AS A MEMBER of that local community.  She doesn't like "Heritage Action for America" nor "Citizens for Renewing America," but she's okay with being a member of "Rutherford County Library Alliance."  She's no Tennessee Walking Horse, she's an ALA stalking horse.

As I go on, know this: many "parents" groups around the nation pressuring libraries to keep children exposed to inappropriate material are actually astroturfed creations of ALA, the very out-of-state organization exposing children to harm.  It's an ALA pattern nationwide.  Is your library getting a lot of out-of-towners pressuring your library board into what the community supposedly opposes?  Good chance it's an ALA astroturf mob.  Sort of like when school librarian Martha Hickson handed out trademarked logos of ALA in a New Jersey school board meeting, but I digress. 


Supporter Angela Frederick, an area representative for the Tennessee Association of School Librarians [TASL], writes on Facebook in support of the astroturfed parent group to get them to get out huge numbers, and the books she's talking about that the library removed are "Gender Queer," "Flamer," (detailed above in a post by Asra Nomani to give an example of what a school librarian is defending and how it and books like it are promoted by any means necessary, including as a substitute Bible for being sworn in on a school board—it also illustrates how political activists like someone from Media Matters for America will get on boards simply to promote political agendas, similar to what ALA astroturfed groups are doing to pressure boards) "Let’s Talk About It," and "This Book is Gay," books that promote kink and pedophilia:

TN Public Library Supporters:

I am writing today to let you know of a situation currently affecting the Rutherford County Library System. 

Several books were removed from the collection by the RCLS Library Board back in August.  The steering committee of the Rutherford County Commission met in November and stated that the library board had sought their help in ensuring that the library staff didn't purchase any other objectionable materials using taxpayer funds.  The steering committee directed the library board to come up with a plan to prevent these purchases, and stated that if such a plan was not acceptable to them, they would pull county funding from RCLS. 

Currently Rutherford County funds 60% of RCLS's budget, so no county funding will essentially close the libraries.  This would obviously be a travesty for the residents of Rutherford County. 

If you are a resident of Rutherford County, please contact the steering committee and let them know how a defunded public library would affect our community.  You can copy and paste these addresses to contact them directly:  (district8@rutherfordcountytn.gov, district13@rutherfordcountytn.gov, jbeverly@rutherfordcountytn.gov, district18@rutherfordcountytn.gov, district7@rutherfordcountytn.gov, craigharris@rutherfordcountytn.gov, district3@rutherfordcountytn.gov)  

Another way to help is to attend the next meetings of both the library board and the steering committee.  The library board will have a specially called meeting on Monday, December 18th at 5:00 p.m. at the Rutherford County Courthouse.  The next steering committee meeting is on Monday, January 8th at 5:30 p.m. at the Historic County Courthouse Commission Chamber.  We need all the attention we can get on these two meetings. 

Helpful links:
Interview with Rutherford County Library Alliance members: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zisf2MWKcLk&t=29s

Thank you,
Angela Frederick
TASL Member
[Ed: TASL Area Representative, Buffalo River Region, term ends 2024]
-- 
Angela Frederick
angela.frederick@gmail.com

See that?  "The steering committee directed the library board to come up with a plan to prevent these purchases, and stated that if such a plan was not acceptable to them, they would pull county funding from RCLS."  That's a double standard, meaning a lie.  Librarians brag about pulling funding from libraries in states that adopt the "Right to Read Act" that explicitly makes ALA's "Library Bill of Rights" into state law without any discussion of its radical 60s roots.  They are gleeful about that.  See: "To Fight So-called Book Bans, Some States are Threatening to Withhold Funding," All Things Considered, NPR, 14 December 2023.

But here a library is going to pull funding if the librarians keep buying CSAM, and suddenly this ALA astroturf group led by a CRT Toolkit creator from out-of-state is crying about a denial of rights.  Double standard.  

The whole astroturf published on Facebook was about "defunding" the library because CSAM was removed and they feign fear more will be removed.  They want people to write to the board.  They want people to attend the meetings.  "We need all the attention we can get on these two meetings."  

But it's not locals who want this.  It's ALA!  ALA is using an astroturf group they created, funded, and gave publicity!  

So if Tennessee wants to see Tennessee Walking Horses putting on a show after being trained by ALA with direction to make excuses for CSAM by claiming children have a First Amendment right to that, then go watch the circus in action.  Do go, to support the board against the ALA's astroturfed group.  But the board should stay on course and serve common sense, community standards, and the law, and not some Marxist-led group of librarians from Chicago, Illinois, who created a local group to pressure and bully the board.  

So now the board knows the truth.  Now we know Rutherford County Library Alliance is a stalking horse for American Library Association, being used to obtain a temporary advantage so that out-of-state ALA can target what it really wants: children in Murfreesboro, TN.

And this kind of circus set up by ALA is happening in community after community, set up by ALA.  Everyone, not just Tennessee, should learn about and ignore/defeat the ALA astroturfed acolytes.

I'll be sending this to the email addresses I learned from the astroturfers.

By the way, here's ALA targeting children, because if a board allows an ALA astroturf group to pressure it, it might as well see what ALA wants—children:




—
URL of this page: 



Join World Library Association:

WorldLibraryAssociation.org
at No comments:

Wednesday, November 29, 2023

School Library Journal Defamation of SafeLibraries

School Library Journal loves SafeLibraries!  Not really.  It has decided to defame me with a false claim of harassment.  It blocks me on social media and smears me in print.  But that's one way to tell if an investigative reporter is being effective.  School Library Journal certainly thinks so: 

A public teen librarian in Maryland described harassment at the library, online, and in the media.

“A person spray-painted ‘GR[**]MER’ on two of our buildings, and a woman came to a program and loudly talked about ‘those people’ and called an LGBTQ+ display ‘disgusting,’” the librarian wrote. “I was also harassed by Dan Kleinman of Safe Libraries for being a groomer based on my work with the Rainbow Book List. My social justice camps were featured on Fox News web.”

SLJ Staff. “School and Public Librarians Describe On-the-Job Harassment.” School Library Journal, November 16, 2023. https://www.slj.com/story/School-and-Public-Librarians-describe-on-the-job-harassment-censorship.  [Pictured above right.]

Naturally, what School Library Journal has reported about me is false.  It may amount to defamation.  I might write to have a correction submitted based on the following.

I looked up "The 2023 Rainbow Book List" to find, "Members of the 2023 Rainbow Book List are: ... Isaiah West, Prince George’s County Memorial Library System (MD)...," where Isaiah West, pictured at right, was the only member from Maryland, as indicated in the School Library Journal hit piece.  I do not recall ever hearing that name or seeing that face before.  Searches on my social media provide zero results (until now, I suppose).  

So I'm being accused of misdemeanor harassment in Maryland by a guy I don't know and never discussed in writing, and School Library Journal is publishing it as if it were true.  To me, that's defamation, and when one is accused of a misdemeanor/crime, that's defamation per se.  Especially so in light of SLJ doing no copy editing/fact checking, in which case no connection between me and Isaiah West would have been found and SLJ would have struck the defamation from the story.  

Journalists are supposed to fact check, even double check, after all.  Don't let the name "School Library Journal" fool you, there's no actual journalism being practiced.

Just to be sure I have identified the right person, I dug a little deeper and I found him and his "social justice camps," as referenced in SLJ's defamatory publication.  So I'm certain that's him smearing me, I'm certain it's a fiction, and now I'm certain School Library Journal may have committed defamation per se.  

I'll start with asking for a correction, although if the print edition is already out, it may be too late.  And doing a stealth edit online (like American Libraries does) will not be enough.  There must be a public correction and I must be informed where it is online and in print.  You don't just defame parents who oppose American Library Association's s3xualization of school children by school librarians and get away with it.

Here is that additional evidence I considered:


Smith, Letitia. “August 2023 Member of the Month: Isaiah West.” Text. Young Adult Library Services Association (YALSA), July 27, 2023. https://www.ala.org/yalsa/august-2023-member-month-isaiah-west.


Conclusion:




NOTE ADDED EVEN DATE:

I have requested a retraction from School Library Journal.  No response yet.

I have filed a FOIA request with Prince George's County Memorial Library System.  PGCMLS has 30 days to respond, starting tomorrow.


at No comments:

Saturday, October 7, 2023

Library Award Winner Kelly Jensen Caught Promoting Censorship of Parents During Banned Books Week

It's still Banned Books Week.  Banned Books Week trainer Kelly Jensen of Book Riot calls parents "Christofascists" for challenging explicit books in schools.  For this and more, school librarian Amanda Jones, who filed a defamation suit against parents to silence them and lost repeatedly in dramatic fashion, arranged for Kelly Jensen to win an award for defending "intellectual freedom."  And how does Kelly Jensen behave as a trainer during Banned Books Week?  She complains that "rw [right wing]" parents might have seen a presentation she made with EveryLibrary, a de facto ALA organization that itself trains people to hide things from parents but also legislators.

Banned Books Week is such a huge hoax.  As more evidence, right during it, one of the awarded "intellectual freedom" winners is complaining parents might have seen what she and John Chrastka was saying.  So clearly she knows what she was saying is deceptively false.  And projecting her own fascism, she wants people to report to the media "something suspicious going on," while parents who do this are "moles."

SO WATCH IT!  SEE WHAT THE BANNED BOOKS WEEK TRAINER DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE.  Listen closely as they talk about how they are creating local groups to keep the explicit books flowing.  Opposition to removing inappropriate books from schools is astroturfed by the ALA.  No wonder they don't want people hearing this, among many other reasons.  Just listen.

Below are the original reports on this matter where the training can be seen at full length, credit to Haley Kennington of the Kennington Report.  Haley Kennington also broke open the Banned Books Week leader Deborah Caldwell-Stone, Esq., of American Library Association's "Office for Intellectual Freedom," training librarians how to block Christian books and publishers from public library meetings rooms.

Oh yes, investigative reporter Haley Kennington previously reported on this intellectual freedom winner Kelly Jensen, and it's not pretty:
See also:

Ladies and gentlemen, Kelly Jensen of Book Riot, a Banned Books Week trainer, because Banned Books Week is a hoax:











at No comments:

Saturday, September 16, 2023

Notice and Demand: Withdraw NH State Library and NH Library Association Membership from ALA

Below in full is a form letter New Hampshire people can sign to demand the New Hampshire State Library [@nhsl] and New Hampshire Library Association withdraw from the American Library Association [@ALALibrary].  Source for the form for those interested:
I note some of the basis for the contents of this form can be sourced to the new World Library Association [@WLibraryA].  I am happy WLA is starting to make a difference.  Send the URL of this page or the form itself above to all your friends and families in New Hampshire.



Notice and Demand

Withdraw NH State Library and NH Library Association Membership from ALA

Legal Notice and Warning

To: 
Sarah L. Stewart, Commissioner
NH Department of Natural & Cultural Resources

Representative Mike Drago

From the people of New Hampshire and the following New Hampshire House Representatives:
Representative Arlene Quaratiello [@ArleneQforNHRep]
Representative Jake Brouillard
Representative Karen Reid
Representative Kristine Perez
Representative Riché Colcombe

_______________________


Notice to agent is Notice to Principal and Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent  



I,  , one of the people, as seen in New Hampshire Constitution Bill of Rights Article 1, Sui Juris, am serving Sarah L. Stewart, Commissioner of the NH Department of Cultural and Natural Resources, and Mike Drago, a member of the NH Legislature, with due notice; so that you, as agents of the people, may provide due care and remember your oath which binds you.
 
New Hampshire Constitution Part 2 Article 84. [Oath of Civil Officers.] Any person chosen governor, councilor, senator, or representative, military or civil officer, (town officers excepted) accepting the trust, shall, before he proceeds to execute the duties of his office, make and subscribe the following declaration, viz.

I, A.B. do solemnly swear, that I will bear faith and true allegiance to the United States of America and the state of New Hampshire, and will support the constitution thereof. So help me God.

Maxim of Law 84c. Punishment is due if the words of an oath be false. Black's, 840.

New Hampshire Constitution Part 1 Article 8. [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.] All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them.

Maxim of Law 4d. An agent is a person authorized by another to act on his account and under his control. Wasilowski v. Park Bridge Corp., 156 F.2d 612, 614.

Take notice that the diffusion of knowledge and literature in the public realm is an expressly delegated authority in the trust indenture contract called the New Hampshire Constitution. The expressed end of the diffusion of knowledge is to promote the preservation of free government. The historical usage/customs analysis from the time of the adoption of the constitution is clear regarding what is permissible use of taxpayer funds for the encouragement of literature. Where the constitution expresses a duty, it must be strictly adhered to. No interpretation is allowed. Furthermore, only the authority that is expressed is in fact granted; no further grant is permitted; and any other authority taken other than what is expressly granted is an unlawful trespass.
 
Maxim of Law: That which is granted or reserved in a certain specified form must be taken as it is granted, and will not be permitted to be made the subject of any adjustment or compensation on the part of the grantee. Ex. parte Miller, 2 Hill (NY) 423; Bacon, Max. 26, reg. 4.
 
Maxim of Law 43b. The expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Co. Litt. 210a; Broom, Max. 3d ed. 596; Pearson v. Lord, 6 Mass. 81, 84.
 
New Hampshire Constitution Part 2 Article 83. [Encouragement of Literature, etc.; Control of Corporations, Monopolies, etc.] Knowledge and learning, generally diffused through a community, being essential to the preservation of a free government; and spreading the opportunities and advantages of education through the various parts of the country, being highly conducive to promote this end; it shall be the duty of the legislators and magistrates, in all future periods of this government, to cherish the interest of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries and public schools, to encourage private and public institutions, rewards, and immunities for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and economy, honesty and punctuality, sincerity, sobriety, and all social affections, and generous sentiments, among the people: Provided, nevertheless, that no money raised by taxation shall ever be granted or applied for the use of the schools of institutions of any religious sect or denomination.
 
Take notice that the legal form of law must be followed. The People of New Hampshire granted you powers to protect their rights, property, and liberty interests. Not following form of law, which is expressly written in the trust indenture known as the constitution, directly harms the people. Harming the people by depriving inherent rights is an irreparable injury. As a servant and trustee of the people, failure to perform will not stand.
 
Maxim of Law 46b. Legal form is essential form. 10 Coke, 100.

"CONSTITUTION. In American law. The written instrument agreed upon by the people of the Union or of a particular state, as the absolute rule of action and decision for all departments and officers of the government in respect to all the points covered by it, which must control until it shall be changed by the authority which established it, and in opposition to which any act or ordinance of any such department or officer is null and void." 
Cooley, Const. Lim. 3. Black’s. 4th ed.

Take notice that you are hereby made aware that Marxist ideology is being perpetrated by ALA president Emily Drabinski, a self-described Marxist, and member of the Democratic Socialists of America, to force Marxist ideologies on communities across the state against the will of the people.

Take notice that Ms. Drabinski has promised to “advance a public agenda that puts organizing for justice at the center of library work.” In a 2013 publication titled Queering the Catalog: Queer Theory and the Politics of Correction she supported the idea of forcing librarians to become politically engaged. She further stated at the 2023 Socialism conference in Chicago, "Public education needs to be a site of socialist organizing. I think libraries really do too. ...Classroom libraries, but also school libraries of all kinds." She concluded that "We need to be on the agenda of socialist organizing."
 
Take notice that Marxist ideology is contrary to the liberty interests of the People and the form of government you swore to protect. By allowing Marxist ideology to be knowingly brought into public libraries, you are in violation of your expressly delegated duties and the fundamental principles of law in New Hampshire.
 
Take notice that the law precludes a decision on any matter to be made on the grounds of cultural zeitgeist; it is of no consequence if some people or persons in our society promulgate the idea that Marxism is acceptable, regardless of their reasoning. In the words and actions of ALA president Emily Drabinski, she and the ALA are actively promoting Marxist ideology by organizing ALA member librarians and trustees against the wishes of the communities they claim to serve. Again, the expressed purpose of public education and funding for public libraries is to promote the preservation of a free government. The law is clear.
 
Maxim of Law 39y. Principles prove, they are not proved. 3 Coke, 40. Fundamental principles require no proof; or, in Lord Coke's words, "they ought to be approved, because they cannot be proved." 3 Coke, 50a.

Take notice that we do not live in a democracy where a majority, or even a vocal minority, has any right to subvert the law or control the rights of others. Rather, we live in a constitutional republic where the rule of law is written; and all lawful laws must be obeyed. In a constitutional republic, our form of government is found in the strict guidelines laid out in the grants of powers; and antecedent to all governments, our individual rights are guaranteed and not to be questioned. It is therefore against the trust reposed in government to promote any ideologies that collective privileges or grievances are somehow of higher authority than individual rights given to us by God. Since the foundation of the law of the land is clear on the matter, it is maladministration for any public servant to permit the promotion of any form of Marxist or Socialist ideology that is contrary to our republican form of government.

Kentucky Constitution Bill of Rights Section 2: Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.

Maxim of Law 51a. The government cannot load a citizen with imposition against his will or consent. 2 Coke, 61.

Maxim of Law 51b. The government is to be subject to the law, for the law makes the government. C.L.M.

Maxim of Law 51c. Obedience makes government, not the name by which it is called. C.L.M.

Take notice that the New Hampshire Library Association (NHLA) is a member of the American Library Association (ALA). The ALA is promoting the diffusion of inappropriate material in public libraries across New Hampshire as well as other states. Recently, Montana and Texas have taken the lead in standing for the rights of the People by cutting ties with the ALA because of the ALA's stance on using libraries as places to gather collective power and sew public discourse.

Take notice that as a servant or trustee, you contracted with the people. The common law is the law of the land. The People have a guaranteed right to redress any harm against them. The People have in personam jurisdiction over their servants and trustees at all times. It is the duty and responsibility of the People to teach you the law and keep you safe and from making errors. You have been notified, and this will now stand as evidence in any court of record.

Maxim of Law 92aa. The deprivation of any rights may be punished. Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. (71 U.S.) 277, 320.

New Hampshire Constitution Part 1 Article 7. [State Sovereignty.] The people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in Congress assembled.

Take notice that I, one of the People, for the reasons stated above, order Sarah L. Stewart, Commissioner of the Department of Cultural and Natural Resources, to immediately withdraw the New Hampshire State Library and the New Hampshire Library Association membership(s) from the American Library Association; and for House Representative Mike Drago to ensure that my order is carried out. In the event that Commissioner Stewart does not comply within three (3) business days of receiving this notice, I further instruct said Representative to form an investigatory committee and begin impeachment proceedings, by the authority vested in them in NH Constitution Part 2 Articles 17 and 38.

Maxim of Law 52b. When anything is granted to another, that also is granted without which the thing granted would be of no effect, or cannot exist. 11 Coke, 52; Shep. Touch. 89; Hob. 234; 3 Kent, Comm. 421; Ienk. Cent. 32 case 63; Co. Litt. 56a; People v. Hicks, 15 Barb. (N.Y.) 153, 160.

Maxim of Law: When anything is commanded, everything by which it can be accomplished is also commanded. 5 Coke, 116.

Maxim of Law: One lawfully commanding must be obeyed. Jenk. Cent. 120.

Maxim of Law: Obedience is the essence of the law. 11 Coke, 100.

Take notice that the People have found at times that servants and trustees are getting false information from private associations called (BAR Assoc). These entities are not government nor are they public. They did not contract with the People. If you take harmful advice against your Oath and the Trust Indentures known as the Constitutions, they cannot protect you from maladministration. Maladministration is the jurisdiction of the People, the highest authority. You contracted with the People.

Maxim of Law 24k. The contract makes the law. Black’s, 2d. 704; Bouv. 135; Allen v. Merch. Bank of N.Y., 22 Wend. (N.Y.) 215, 233.

Maxim of Law 57a. Ignorance of those things which one is bound to know excuses not. Hale, P.C. 42; Broom Max. 267; 4 bl. Comm. 27.

Maxim of Law 24j. Private contacts (or agreements) cannot derogate from public law or right. Dig. 50,17,144,1.
 
Maxim of Law 5h. There is no doubt that the rights of others cannot be prejudiced by private agreements. Dig. 2, 15, 3, pr.; Broom, Max. 623.
 
Take notice that as a servant of the People, you are also protected by the People's authority as you perform the good works and grants of power specifically laid out in the expressed public trust indenture known as the Constitution. All statutes are to be in pursuance of the Constitution, and we the People are aware of more corrections to be made. Let this Notice be your shield and armor to carry out your sworn duty without delay.

Please take final notice. As Trustees and Servants of the People, you must adhere to the New Hampshire Constitution, as all provisions are strictly mandatory. As Trustees and Servants of the People, if you believe these statements to be untrue, or if you believe that you have the authority to disregard the form of law and trample the inherent rights of the People by refusing to follow the demands in this notice, you must respond by affidavit, point by point sworn under the penalty of perjury showing where you derive authority to disobey these demands.
If you fail to show clear grants of constitutional authority, then your actions are a trespass against the People with full knowledge, intent, and malice. The People can and ought to be redressed of their grievances for their individual rights being trespassed. Any man or woman who decides to suppress this notice agrees to pay ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per infraction, and any disputes by any public officials or private actors who are bound by contract to the New Hampshire Constitution agree to have these matters heard before an Arbitrator of my choice to be bound thereby. All responses must be submitted by affidavit, point by point, sworn under penalty of perjury within seven (7) days of receiving this notice, or you agree, by acquiescence, that all statements in this notice are true and fact. Further, you agree that you are acting with full intent, knowledge, and malice by trespassing against the People and that no court shall be able to rehear this matter, but it shall stand as evidence, truth, and law in all courts of record.

Maxim of Law: It has been said, with much truth, "Where the law ends, tyranny begins." Merritt v. Welsh, 14 Otto (104 U.S.) 694, 702.
 
This notice is sent to you in peace and with the love of Christ so that you may provide due care to those who have all political power, the People.



—
URL of this page: 

 

Join World Library Association:

WorldLibraryAssociation.org
at 5 comments: