Mediaboss Marketing

Waltham Mayor Jeannette A. McCarthy and Waltham Police Chief Kevin OConnell did not respond to requests for comment, and a spokesperson for the police department declined to comment. Neither the Department for Children and Families nor SEIU Local 509, the union for social workers, could immediately be reached for comment.

Last July, Perkins brought the couples 3-month-old son to the emergency room for a fever, according to the complaint. While the baby was there, hospital staff discovered an older, healed fracture on one of his ribs and notified DCF, the complaint said. Unknown to the family, DCF opened a child abuse investigation.

Around 1 a.m. on July 16, DCF workers and Waltham police appeared at the familys front step without a warrant, the lawsuit alleges, and threatened to break down the door if they didnt turn over the baby and his 3-year-old brother.

The children were taken to a foster home, and Sabey and Perkins were not granted full custody until four months later when they were cleared of any wrongdoing, the complaint said.

Sabey said his family has endured lingering trauma as a result of the separation; routine visits to the doctor have become a source of gripping anxiety.

It was incredibly stressful, incredibly traumatic, and now its kind of hard to tell what the long-term effects are on our psychology and how were able to move on, he said.

Joshua Thompson, the parents attorney, said that while defense lawyers may argue that police and DCF workers believed there was an imminent threat to the childrens safety, there was more than enough time to obtain a warrant in the days after DCF learned of the rib injury including the many hours that the couple remained in the hospital.

An imminent threat, in typical Fourth Amendment parlance, means someone had a knife to someone elses throat and you could see it through the window, Thompson said. It doesnt mean that [DCF] discovered a rib injury and then three days later broke into the Sabeys home at one in the morning.

The seizure of the children, which was first reported by the Washington Post in December, sparked public outrage. Neither Sabey nor Perkins have ever been charged with any civil or criminal offense related to their parenting, according to the lawsuit.

The states legal aid agency and public defenders office, the Committee for Public Counsel Services is among those pushing for more oversight. Meanwhile, some legislators hope to change state law so that social workers can only take temporary custody of children without a court order in cases where theres no time to go before a judge.

The allegations made in this lawsuit echo what we hear from our clients across the state every single day: DCF is frequently overzealous in separating families, and removing children from their homes after hours and without court oversight has long-term, irreversible effects on children and their parents, Mike Dsida, who leads the committees Children and Family Law Division, said in a statement.

Dsida said the lawsuit outlines a fact pattern that is all too common. Families in Massachusetts deserve better, and if this suit leads to change, it would be a welcome step in the right direction.

Josh Gupta-Kagan, professor at Columbia Law School, identified three ways an organization can push DCF toward policy change. The first would be to sue the agency itself for a pattern or practice of civil rights violations, he explained. The second would be to seek injunctive relief in a lawsuit, which sets a precedent for how an agency is allowed to operate in similar cases moving forward. Finally, in the event that the case is appealed up to the US Court of Appeals or the US Supreme Court, there is a likelihood that the federal court would set a legal precedent that applies not only to child welfare practices in Massachusetts, but more broadly across the country.

Gupta-Kagan also noted that lawsuits against individual employees, like the one filed by the Sabey family, still have the potential if successful to spur structural change within an agency.

By allowing one officer to be sued in an individual capacity, its supposed to create a deterrent effect for someone else in the future, he said. Then the agency is supposed to be thinking, Oh wait, if I screw up again and violate a familys rights, then [our employees] could be held liable.

Sabey said hes trying to raise awareness about the issue, going as far as writing a book about his familys experience to spread the word. One of the greatest frustrations about it all, Sabey said, is the number of hurdles preventing families from taking legal action against agencies responsible for systemic problems.

The individuals were just really just cogs in the system thats forced to do what it does by its own policies and perceived responsibilities, he said. And that system just churns out injustice after injustice.

Ivy Scott can be reached at ivy.scott@globe.com. Follow her on Twitter @itsivyscott.

See original here:
Parents file lawsuit alleging civil rights violations after children were ... - The Boston Globe

by April Corbin Girnus, Nevada Current

Untold numbers of sexual assault cases nationwide have been solved after DNA evidence linked perpetrators to their crimes, but victims of sexual assault should not have to worry that their own DNA will be used against them.

Senate Bill 321 would protect victims of sexual assault from having the DNA they submit as part of a rape kit used to prosecute them for crimes. Such samples could only be used to prosecute the perpetrator of their sexual assault. The bill passed the Nevada State Senate unanimously on April 25 and was heard by the Assembly Judiciary committee Tuesday.

State Sen. Lisa Krasner, R-Reno, brought forward the bill, and 19 lawmakers across both chambers and parties have signed on as primary or co-sponsors.

Krasner pointed to a high profile incident in California as a reason why Nevada should be proactive on the issue of protecting victims of sexual assault.

San Franciscos district attorney last year revealed the citys police crime lab used DNA collected during a rape kit in 2016 to tie a sexual assault victim to a burglary in 2021. The citys police chief called it a horrendous mistake and vowed it would not happen again, but the incident sparked broad calls for states to strengthen safeguards against such use.

Sexual assault is one of the most underreported crimes. Fear that their DNA or other forensic evidence collected during a rape kit might be used against them in unrelated cases is believed to be contributing to underreporting. Other reasons why victims dont come forward include fear of not being believed, fear of retribution by their assailant, or feeling like justice is futile. (Just under 20% of reported rapes in Nevada in 2022 resulted in an arrest, according to the Department of Public Safety.)

We have to do better, said Krasner. Collecting and properly processing sexual assault crime evidence and rape kits is vital to that effort. We must do everything we can to help victims feel safe in coming forward.

In 2019, she added, citing FBI data, Nevada had one of the highest rates of reported rape per capita. Since then, the states rate of reported rapes per capita has seen a small but steady decline.

We have to wonder if that just means that victim survivors are choosing not to come forward and report the rape to law enforcement, she said.

Nevada already has a Sexual Assault Survivors Bill of Rights, which specifies that forensic evidence from a sexual assault survivor cannot be used to prosecute that survivor for any misdemeanor or offense related to a controlled substance. SB321 would expand that protection to any crime.

No Assembly Judiciary committee member expressed objections to the proposed bill.

Besides the humanity and sensitivity of the issue, its also a Fourth Amendment issue, said Democratic Assemblywoman Britney Miller, referring to the right to privacy established in the U.S. Constitution. Even if you cant extend yourself to humanity and sensitivity, it is a strong constitutional issue.

SB321 is being supported by a broad coalition that includes the Nevada District Attorneys Association, the public defenders offices in Clark and Washoe counties, and several law enforcement groups, including the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department.

LVMPD lobbyist Beth Schmidt said during her testimony in support that Metro does not run sexual assault victim DNA through the national DNA database known as CODIS, or the Combined DNA Index System.

We appreciate codifying this into statute, she added.

Steve Gresko, the administrator of CODIS for Nevada and a supervising criminalist at the Washoe County Sheriffs Office, also testified that CODIS does not currently include victim DNA.

Gresko said law enforcement agencies will occasionally turn to forensic evidence collected through a rape kit if the victim of a sexual assault later becomes a missing person and no other DNA reference sample can be found. In those cases, the purpose is not to prosecute but only to identify the person.

Read more:
Nevada moves to strengthen protections around use of sexual ... - This Is Reno

Warrantless searches of US residents' communications by the FBI dropped sharply last year from about 3.4 million in 2021 to 119,383 in 2022, according to Uncle Sam.

But that is still likely tens of thousands more people than should have been caught up in the FBI's domestic surveillance efforts, according to advocates for reform of Section 702 the legislative instrument that allows warrantless snooping.

The numbers mentioned above were revealed in the annual Office of the Director of National Intelligence report, released at the end of last week. The report came just after Congress held a subcommittee hearing on Section 702 surveillance authority.

Section 702 is a provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and gives US government snoops the authority to surveil Americans' electronic communications without a warrant. The power is set to expire at the end of the year unless Congress renews it.

While law enforcement has long argued [PDF] that Section 702 saves lives and is an indispensable tool when it comes to fighting terrorism, data privacy and civil liberties groups maintain it violates the Fourth Amendment and needs a major overhaul to prevent further unconstitutional surveillance.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence report [PDF] gives several reasons for the decline in Section 702 searches related to US citizens and residents. For one, the FBI changed the methodology used to calculate the number of Section 702 searches, and says previous years' reports used duplicative counting methods.

A better estimate of 2021's warrantless communications searches puts the number closer to 3 million, not 3.4 million, for example, according to the government report.

This is like doing a touchdown dance because you threw an incomplete pass instead of an interception

Even at just 3 million, the 2021 number is a massive spike versus 2020's approximately 853,000 searches, and the report attributes this to "a number of large batch jobs" in the first half of 2021 related to one particular investigation into "attempts by foreign cyber actors to compromise US critical infrastructure."

"These queries, which included approximately 1.9 million queries related to potential victims including US persons accounted for the vast majority of the increase in US person queries conducted by FBI over the prior year," it notes.

Additionally, over the past year the FBI implemented new processes around Section 702 searches, including mandatory query training and "enhanced approval requirements for certain 'sensitive' queries, such as those involving domestic public officials or members of the news media."

It also now requires FBI agents to "opt-in" if they wish to run a search against Section 702-acquired data, instead of having queries run against this data by default.

All of these measures contributed to the drop in warrantless searches, according to the report.

Proponents of Section 702 reform take a slightly different view, unsurprisingly.

Around 119,000 queries represents an "undeniably a big drop" from previous years' searches, said Jake Laperruque, deputy director of Center for Democracy and Technology's Security and Surveillance Project.

"But to me, this is like doing a touchdown dance because you threw an incomplete pass instead of an interception," he told The Register.

"It's still a very bad thing in desperate need of reform. We're still talking about hundreds of thousands of searches for Americans' private wireless data."

For comparison, Laperruque pointed to the 2,245 wiretaps authorized by state and federal judges in 2021 and the application process and judicial review that law enforcement must go through to obtain these surveillance tools, compared to the "backdoor search loophole" in Section 702.

"The fact that this was being framed as like a major decline just shows how much of a bizarre world we are in with this provision of FISA," he said.

Follow this link:
Feds rethink warrantless search stats and oh look, a huge drop in numbers - The Register

He called it the Cruzing to Victory Tour 2023.

A northwest Missouri man convicted for his role in the Capitol riot took to the highways last week, riding his motorcycle to Washington, D.C., for his sentencing on Tuesday.

Lloyd Casimiro Cruz Jr., of Polo about 50 miles northeast of Kansas City saw the event as a way to raise funds for his legal bills and highlight what he says are the bogus cases brought against him and other J6ers charged in the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.

The Justice Department, however, saw it as a failure to take responsibility for his actions and one of multiple reasons why he should be sentenced to a year in jail.

On Tuesday morning in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Judge Reggie B. Walton handed down a sentence of 45 days incarceration followed by one year of supervised release and $500 restitution for the nearly $2.9 million in damages the government said resulted from the attack.

Cruz, 40, was facing up to 18 months incarceration, restitution and a $5,000 fine. The government requested 12 months incarceration, one year of supervised release, 60 hours of community service, and $500 restitution.

The stay-at-home father of four had declined to accept a plea deal and instead agreed to a Jan. 13 bench trial before the judge, waiving his right to a trial in front of a jury. He was found guilty of one count of parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building and one count of entering or remaining in a restricted building or grounds. Both charges are misdemeanors.

Prior to his conviction, Cruz filed a motion to dismiss his case, saying the charges were undeniably unconstitutional and that he was merely exercising his First Amendment rights when he entered the Capitol. In another motion, Cruz argued that the evidence obtained from the search of cellular location data that showed he was in the Capitol during the Jan. 6 attack should be suppressed and the case dismissed because it originated with a massive violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Story continues

The judge denied both motions.

Cruz, the first Missouri Capitol riot defendant to go to trial, created a website about his case and a GiveSendGo site to raise money that he said would help pay for his lawyer and other court expenses. Anything left over, he said, would be given to other Jan. 6 defendants for their legal costs.

Please help with anything you can I am looking at 2 years for only walking around the Capitol, he wrote on the fundraising site. There were no signs nor no one saying I couldnt be in there.

As of Tuesday morning, hed received $9,995 of the $35,000 requested.

Thank you Patriot brother to you and your family, wrote Bryan Nicklow, who donated $200 last week. Godspeed as you embark on your journey on behalf of yourself and all J6ers and freedom loving Americans. I am praying for your safety and success.

Cruzs case has attracted the attention of his state representative, Mazzie Boyd, a Republican from Hamilton. His website features photos of Boyd posing with him and his family around the motorcycle.

In an April 12 letter To the Great People of Missouri, Boyd whose bio says she has worked in the Trump White House and in the congressional office of Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia wrote that it is disheartening to see the United States Judicial system being perverted.

Not only has it been used as a political tool against President Donald Trump, but also against my Constituent Lloyd Cruz, she wrote.

She called Cruz a political prisoner, adding that the only reason he is being charged is because of his support for President Trump.

Cruz left Kansas City on Wednesday and live streamed updates on Rumble, an online video-sharing site. He told supporters that he has paid a high price for his actions.

I went to D.C. to support President Trump and because I thought that if it was his last time, then at least I got to see him one last time, he said on his stream Saturday night. And from there, it was spur-of-the-moment. He said he walked into the Capitol on Jan. 6, walked around briefly, then left.

Never said a word, never touched anything, he said. For walking around for less than seven minutes, its literally cost me everything. Ive received hate mail people I thought were close to me, they tossed me aside, too my own family refused to help me out when I needed it.

Prosecutors described Cruzs Jan. 6 involvement in a sentencing memorandum filed last week.

Cruz drove with two others to Washington to attend the pro-Trump Stop the Steal rally, the document said. After the rally, it said, he walked to the Capitol, where he joined a mob of rioters that had gathered on the West Plaza.

While there, he observed and video-recorded police officers deploying flash bangs and chemical spray to disperse the crowd of rioters. Around 2:10 p.m., the document said, Cruz followed the protesters who had broken through police lines.

As Cruz ascended the stairs to the Upper West Terrace, Cruz exclaimed, We broke down the gate. We broke through the gate and Im going inside! the sentencing document said.

The mob chanted Whose House? Our House! as Cruz approached the Senate Wing Door, and he saw rioters entering the Capitol through broken windows, the document said. Cruz entered the building through the Senate Wing Door at 2:14 p.m., one to two minutes after the initial breach at that location.

Prosecutors say this photo from U.S. Capitol surveillance video shows Lloyd Casimiro Cruz Jr., of Polo, Missouri, entering the building through the Senate Wing Door.

Cruz roamed the building with rioters as they chanted in the halls, then entered the Crypt about 2:17 p.m., according to the governments filing. He left through the Senate Wing Door about 2:20 p.m., recording everything on his GoPro camera.

Cruz first denied going into the building, the government said, stating that he went on the Capitol grounds to help injured people. Later, he gave the FBI a thumb drive that contained photos and videos of his trip to D.C. He said that reviewing the videos reminded him that he entered the U.S. Capitol building on January 6, 2021.

After being charged, the government said, Cruz created a Twitter account in which he posted repeated solicitations for donations, and politically charged content, including conspiracy theories about what occurred on January 6.

And in the days leading up to his trial, the sentencing document said, Cruz repeatedly posted statements minimizing his conduct.

Since his conviction, Cruz has continued to post statements downplaying the riot, the government said. Those posts, it said, include conspiracy theories that Cruz would know from his own experience are false, such as that the rioters were let in to the building by police and the Capitol riot was a set up.

The government also mentioned the Cruz for Victory motorcycle ride to D.C. and Cruzs GiveSendGo donation site, where he makes blatantly false statements about his conduct on January 6, 2021, the sentencing document said.

Those examples illustrate Cruzs complete failure to take responsibility for his actions, the government said. It added that his continued attempts to garner sympathy based on false statements about his own conduct, false statements about what happened at the Capitol on January 6, and statements portraying himself as a victim are repugnant.

The government said Cruz also has a significant criminal history that includes four felony convictions from 2004 to 2007 for distribution of a controlled substance; possession of forged instruments; theft/receiving stolen property; and forgery of a check/commercial instrument. Some of the convictions, it said, resulted in prison sentences.

Cruz has failed to pay thousands in fines and costs ordered by the court in those cases, the government said, further demonstrating that he has no respect for the law and specific deterrence for this defendant is greatly needed in this case.

In Cruzs own sentencing memorandum filed last week, his attorney, John Pierce, said Cruz cooperated with the investigation and voluntarily spoke to the FBI on four occasions. Cruz also handed over photos and videos taken when he was at the Capitol, Pierce said.

Pierce asked the court not to require Cruz to pay restitution for damage to the Capitol but to instead order a fine of $2,000 to $3,000.

He did not stipulate to nor was he charged with damaging anything or hurting anyone, Pierce wrote. He would consider it a problem with his conscience and honor to be ordered to pay restitution when he never harmed anything or anyone.

As for Cruzs criminal history, Pierce wrote that other than his current case, the record shows that the Defendant had clearly reformed and become a law-abiding citizen after some unfortunate early incidents.

This indicates that his early mistakes had a profound impact on him and caused him to turn away from them.

Originally posted here:
Its literally cost me everything. Missouri man gets jail time in Capitol riot case - Yahoo News

Posters by students in a U.S. History class at Flagler Palm Coast High School, posted in the hallway. The class required students to produce posters in line with what they had learned of the civil rights era and its protest movements. A student at the school found some of the posters offensive, and tore them down. A pair of school board members now want to revisit policies that address what may be displayed in hallways. ( FlaglerLive)

In response to one parents complaint about civil rights era-inspired posters by students, and to the the parents son vandalizing posters he found offensive at Flagler Palm Coast High School, School Board member Christy Chong has rallied to the side of the parent and the student and is seeking to revisit policies that address the display of student work in school hallways.

Board members Will Furry and Sally Hunt are joining Chong in seeking that discussion. Chong did not seem concerned with the vandalism of student work, or that the displays were a required part of their course of study.

It is the latest example of a a school board reassessing time-tested and long-standing academic practices through culture-war litmus tests. The sharp shift, which led to the boards firing of the superintendent last month, appears to have little to no connection to classroom goals. Rather, echoing similar shifts at the state Board of Education and the legislature, it ties into a reframing of classrooms and schools on ideological grounds, leaving administrators and faculty reeling from surprises such as the one Chong sprang on the board at the end of a workshop Tuesday.

Chong, who two months ago wanted a safe space sign removed from a classroom at Matanzas High, said she wanted to revisit the policy that controls advertising in schools. I wanted to look at updating and clarifying policy 904, she said. Ive had a lot of parents reaching out about signs that are in school, posters and that sort of thing, and whats allowed.

Actually, one parent emailed her on April 25 regarding one incident at Flagler Palm Coast High School. It had nothing to do with advertising. It had to do with posters produced by students as part of their history course work. The posters were displayed in hallways, as teachers routinely display student work in most schools in the district, in the state, and in the country.

Bobby Bossardet, the principal at FPC, had told Chong, as hed told the teacher responsible for the posters, that the project was appropriate for the US history class that he teaches.

The posters were developed as part of a unit on civil rights. The assignment was to focus on one aspect of civil rights history, leaving it to each student to decide for himself, herself or themselves, what to illustrate. Some chose womens rights. Some chose Black rights. Some chose Chicano rights (we will not be intimidated). Some chose LGBTQ rights, and some the anti-war movement. All themes had their roots in the civil rights era, which paralleled the Vietnam War.

The parents son was not happy with the LGBTQ posters. He vandalized them, a detail that appeared not to bother Chong: she made no issue of that.

The student was called into the deans office. His parents were contacted and he was given a warning, in accordance with the schools disciplinary matrix. Restitution is part of the disciplinary process too, but since the materials value in dollars was low, it could not be applied. (Last year, in contrast, students were suspended from Flagler Palm Coast High School for three days merely for waving pride flags.)

The students mother emailed Chong, telling her she was reaching out as a mom, resident, fellow christian, and a supporter of you both, referring as well to Will Furry. (She did not write the three other members of the school board, who are also moms and residents, and no less Christian, if not flauntingly so).

My son comes home daily feeling offended by the LGBTQ posters that are posted up throughout the Hallways at FPC, the parent wrote, with considerable exaggeration. If FPC is a small city, the posters occupied parts of a couple of streets, if that much, in otherwise cinder block-bare wall space.

I am not sure if theres anything we can do about this, but its upsetting and also influencing my 14 year old daughter. She came to me a few months ago and told me she might be gay and seemed proud as if she was finally accepted into a group of students who felt Love is Love.'

One of the posters in question included the phrase Love is Love. It isnt clear how or why the words are offensive. It lists in tiny print all possibilities, with straight and aromantic at the top, followed by non-binary, asexual, and so on.

Today I received a call from the Dean at FPC that my son had taken matters into his own hands and removed some of the LGBTQ posters and threw them into the Toilet, the parent wrote. (My son claimed he threw them next to the toilet but I have not confirmed that) He said he just wants to go to school without seeing what he finds offensive posters everywhere. The parent acknowledged that what her son did was wrong, but said he was frustrated and I think having his little sister tell him she may be gay did not help the situation.

The dean informed the parent that her son had carried out an act of vandalism, but that he would get my son in contact with Admin where he can have his voice heard in regards to this content.

She asked Chong whether anything can be done in regards to these posters or is this the new normal we have to accept and endure in our society? Some of the images she attached as examples of offensive posters included lines like Love is never wrong, no more war, Wars a bummer dude, and Peace Love Hippies, all of which, like repeated drawings of VW buses, radiated Vietnam War-era chants of the civil rights movement. Several posters paid tribute to the womens and environmental movements, some to a landmark Fourth Amendment decision, and one to disabilities.

Less than an hour after receiving the email, Chong, bypassing the superintendent, emailed Bossardet, the principal at FPC, asking him to look into this. (Elected officials are generally required not to meddle in administrative, operation matters and to channel their concerns through their employee: the superintendent. They do not have any more authority over a principal or a teacher than does a private citizen.) Chong told Bossardet she believed the display of posters was against school board policy 904.

It is not. Policy 904 controls advertising in school onlywhat may or may not be advertised, including a specific list of eight prohibitions, from slanderous or libelous advertising to advertising of tobacco and alcohol, illegal drugs, political advertising, Advertising that is harassing speech or expression sufficiently severe and pervasive as to create a hostile learning environment, and so on. (See the full policy, last revised in 2019, here.) It has nothing to do with students work or curricular-aligned displays.

After meeting with the U.S. History teacher, Bossardet replied with two pages of single-spaced explanations. He cited five specific Florida standards that teachers must meet within the parameters of that class curriculum. The students, the principal wrote, are asked to develop social activist posters. The lesson focuses on understanding the rise and continuing international influence of the United States as a world leader and the impact of contemporary social and political movements on American life, whether it has to do with feminism, the environmental movement, or historical movements related to Latino, American-Indian, and countercultural issues, among others.

The students pick a social movement of their choice and design a poster with supporting materials. The teachera Navy veteran whos been teaching at FPC since 2016 explained that several students asked him if they could pick the gay liberation movement. Bossardet explained to Chong that the movement unfolded in the 1960s and 70s. Because the topic was aligned with the standard and theme, the teacher agreed.

The gay-liberation movement is ingrained in the civil rights era, with the Stonewall Uprising of 1969 its turning point as gays and lesbians fought back against what had been routine and brutal police raids against gay bars in Manhattan. The events that would unfold over the next six days would fundamentally change the discourse surrounding LGBTQ+ activism in the United States, a summary by the U.S. Library of Congress states.

Bossardet was fully behind his teacher, telling him that his project was aligned to the appropriate standards outlined in the course description. He went further to address Chongs concern: Moving forward, Bossardet wrote the board member, we are asking all teachers at FPC to post the topics of the assignments, along with the appropriate standards the assignment covers. I explained my concern for having any of the work being displayed in our halls for extended periods of times, could be perceived as decor or advertisement. For example, if a poster were to stay up much longer than the unit that the teaching unit that generated it, it could take on a different projection.

Our expectation moving forward is that the work displayed in our hallways is expected to be relevant to what they are currently covering, or just completed, in the class at the time and should be rotated accordingly, Bossardet wrote Chong.

She agreed with the rotation idea and conceded the purpose of the work. These posters do cover current events, she wrote Bossardet last Monday, but could also make some students uncomfortable if displayed for extended periods of time as they support different agendas. I may ask the board to update our policy for more clarification.

The next day, she did.

What he said to me was that this was part of a school assignment, which I can totally understand, Chong told her fellow-board members about the postersnever mentioning the vandalism. But just to use it as an example. Say the kids did an assignment on U.S. presidents. You probably wouldnt hang Trump and Biden posters in the hallways, you know what I mean?

Actually, I think they did, Board member Colleen Conklin said. Im sure they did.

Board member Will Furry was immediately willing to have the discussion. It definitely is very vague and it leaves a lot of open interpretation, he said of Policy 904, whichperhaps unusually for school policiesis neither vague nor leaves much to interpretation.

Maybe we need a new policy, Chong said. Furry was supportive of that, too. With Board member Sally Hunt joining Furry and Chong, there was majority agreement to take up the matter at a subsequent workshop. (Hunt did not appear to know the background of the matter. She agreed to discuss the policy on the pretense that shes willing to reconsider any policy in principle.)

Chong an Furry are not acting in a vacuum, but as part of a growing trend pushing restrictions on what teachers may post or say in their classrooms, specifically regarding LGBTQ-themed materials: The state Board of Educations K-12 rule prohibiting classroom instruction to students in grades 4 through 12 on sexual orientation or gender identity unless its required by academic standards or health class (from which parents may opt out their children), or the just-voted bill in the Florida legislature prohibiting so much as asking a students preferred pronouns, at least in grades K through 8.

Link:
Board Member Rallies to Student Who Vandalized LGBTQ Posters - FlaglerLive.com