Tag: public schools

Justice Department Sues Minnesota for Allowing Boys in Girls’ Sports and Intimate Spaces

The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) and the Minnesota State High School League (MSHSL) on Monday, alleging sex-based discrimination by allowing boys to compete in girls’ sports and use girls’ locker rooms and bathrooms. 

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is a well-known advocate for these policies, and he infamously signed a 2023 law, directing all public schools to provide free menstrual products to all menstruating students, including trans students, in grades 4 to 12.

The 45-page lawsuit was filed in Minnesota federal court, arguing that the “unfair, intentionally discriminatory practice violates the very core of Title IX of the Education Amendments.”

“Title IX’s core purpose is to ensure that both boys and girls have equal educational opportunities. This includes protecting girls’ equal educational athletic opportunities by recognizing that boys have an inherent biological advantage in sports,” the filing reads, noting male and female athletes have “undeniable physiological differences.”

“But Minnesota casts this aside in favor of so-called “gender identity,” a choice that elevates ideology over biology, fairness, and safety. In open defiance of Title IX’s antidiscrimination protections, Minnesota’s policies and practices create unfair competition, deny girls equal educational opportunities, and expose girls to a hostile educational environment with heightened risks of physical injury and psychological harm.”

It further points to the over $3 billion in federal funding that the Minnesota Department of Education receives annually from the US Department of Education (USDOE), arguing that Minnesota has a duty to comply with USDOE’s regulations implementing Title IX.

The MDE also receives approximately $42.6 million annually from the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and is required to comply with HHS’s regulations implementing Title IX.

Keep reading

Kindergarten Teachers Fired for Filming Themselves Celebrating Iran’s Assassination Threat Against Trump Brag That They Have Been Hired at Taxpayer-Funded Pittsburgh Charter School 

Two kindergarten teachers who were terminated from Propel Charter Schools in Pittsburgh after they recorded themselves in a classroom celebrating Iranian state media threats to assassinate President Donald Trump have reportedly been hired at the nearby Urban Pathways Charter School.

The teachers, Kate Patterson and Devin Hays, made national headlines earlier this month after they posted a video showing their excited reaction to a news report about Iran’s threats against Trump.

In the clip, the pair crossed their fingers with huge smiles on their faces while showing the headline: “IRAN ISSUES ASSASSINATION THREAT AGAINST TRUMP: RPT,” while sitting in what appeared to be their Propel classroom.

Propel Schools initially placed Patterson and Hays on paid administrative leave for an internal investigation.

The district later confirmed that both women were “no longer employed,” citing the inappropriate nature of the social media posts and the video made on school property.

“We want to be clear that Propel Schools rejects any suggestion of harm or violence toward anyone,” the school said in a statement obtained by WTAE Pittsburgh. “Such sentiments are incompatible with our values and with the responsibility entrusted to educators who serve children and families.”

The statement continued, “Our focus remains on the safety and well-being of our scholars and on upholding the professionalism and trust our community expects.”

Now, just weeks later, the same two teachers have landed new jobs at Urban Pathways Charter School, a taxpayer-funded charter serving students in Pittsburgh.

A video posted by one of the teachers shows the duo excitedly announcing their new jobs at the school, bragging in the caption, “all I do is win.”

Keep reading

Christian Girl Subjected to Daily Backpack Searches, Scolded for Sharing Her Faith in Jesus

Imagine your daughter being pulled out of math class by a school official and told she must leave her faith at the door – while the very same school encourages other students to walk out for anti-ICE protests.

That’s not hypothetical. That’s exactly what happened to our client at a middle school in Washington state – in a district with a troubling pattern of violating the Constitution.

And we know this district well – because the ACLJ has already held it accountable once before.

Years ago, when our client was just a second grader in this same district, school officials searched her backpack every morning, treating Christian materials like contraband. Simply sharing her faith was enough to trigger daily inspections.

We stepped in. We took action. And we forced the district to back down.

After we sent a demand letter, the school district entered into a formal written agreement – explicitly affirming our client’s constitutional right to share her faith.

However, during a recent math class, the vice principal entered the room, pulled our client aside, and told her she was not allowed to distribute Christian Gospel tracts – even to willing classmates.

Keep reading

School used AI to purge library of ‘inappropriate’ books including Orwell’s 1984 and Twilight, with librarian branded ‘safeguarding risk’

A school used artificial intelligence to censor books in its library including George Orwell’s 1984 and Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight, campaigners claim.

An investigation by Index on Censorship found a secondary school in Greater Manchester earmarked almost 200 books for removal from its library that were deemed ‘inappropriate’.

These also included Michelle Obama‘s autobiography, Becoming and The Notebook by Nicholas Sparks.

The charity, which campaigns for free expression, says the school got AI to generate summaries justifying why each book was not suitable for pupils.

Incredibly, the school librarian was also put under a ‘safeguarding’ investigation – leading to her resignation – for allowing the books in the library.

Index said it would not reveal the name of the librarian or the school, due to her being vulnerable.

Although many of the books were initially removed, it is not known if all of those on the list remain banned from the library.

The case was exposed this week by the school librarian, who spoke to the organisation on condition of her anonymity.

She said the purge began in November 2025, when the headteacher demanded the removal of Laura Bates’ nonfiction title Men Who Hate Women, which is an exposé of incel culture.

The head thought the book was inappropriate due to ‘exposure of misogynistic beliefs’, even though it was kept in a special section for older pupils.

Off the back of this incident, the school then launched an ‘investigation’ into the librarian, and closed the library as a ‘temporary safeguarding measure’.

She was then asked to remove any book that was ‘not written for children’, had ‘themes that could be upsetting to children’ and those that were ‘inappropriate or constitute a safeguarding risk’.

She told Index: ‘I was absolutely gobsmacked. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing.’

The school also reported her to the council as a safeguarding risk due to introducing ‘inappropriate’ books – and there was also a threat of gross misconduct proceedings.

The school shared with her a list of 193 books which it deemed might be inappropriate, seen by Index.

Index said it had seen another document in which the school admitted the reasons given for the censorship had been written by AI.

Keep reading

Is “Taxation Without Representation” Occurring in 2026? Massive School District Bond Fraud Uncovered Across the US

Perhaps no phrase is used more to describe the grievances of the colonists in the lead-up to the American Revolution than “No taxation without representation!”

Mark Maloy, a historian wrote “While the exact phrase did not appear until 1768, the principle of having consent from the people on issues of taxation can be traced all the way back to the Magna Carta in 1215.

The Magna Carta was one of the first steps in limiting the power of the king and transferring that power to the legislative body in England, the Parliament. Parliament had the power to levy taxes. When King Charles I attempted to impose taxes on the English people by himself in 1627, the Parliament passed the Petition of Right the following year, which stated that the subjects of the king “should not be compelled to contribute to any tax, tallage, aid, or other like charge not set by common consent, in parliament.”

The Magna Carta, the Petition of Right and the English Bill of Rights from 1689 helped to form the basis of the British constitution (which is not a single document, but a combination of written and unwritten agreements). The British constitution protected the rights of Englishmen. English colonists in North America believed that they had the same rights as Englishmen. In North America, colonists formed their own colonial governments under charters from the king and regulated their own forms of taxation through their colonial legislatures. For many decades, these colonies enjoyed an extended period of benign neglect as the English parliament let them handle taxation on their own.

In Great Britain in the eighteenth century, there were no income taxes because it was viewed as too much of a government intrusion into the lives of the people. Instead, taxes were placed on property and on imported and exported goods. Money from these taxes helped to pay for public goods and services and supported the government’s military for defense.

In North America, the British colonies regulated their own tax system in each individual colony. These taxes, though, were exceedingly low, and the colonies did not have a professional military to support. Instead, they used a volunteer militia system to defend their towns and homes from attacks along the frontier.

In 1754, the French and Indian War broke out in North America. During the war, the British sent their military to help defend the colonies. The war spread across the globe and became known as the Seven Years’ War. Following Britain’s victory in 1763, the British national debt greatly increased. They now had a larger empire that needed to be defended. In light of this tenuous situation, and since the North American colonists benefited directly from the British military during the war, Great Britain looked to levy taxes on the colonists to raise revenue for the Crown.

In Massachusetts in 1764, James Otis published a pamphlet titled “The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved,” which argued that man’s rights come from God and that governments should only exist to protect those natural rights. He believed that any attempt to tax the colonists without their consent violated the British constitution. Here, Otis made a compelling argument for the need for representation in any taxation on the colonies: “no parts of His Majesty’s dominions can be taxed without their consent; that every part has a right to be represented in the supreme or some subordinate legislature; that the refusal of this would seem to be a contradiction in practice to the theory of the constitution.”

Colonists wrote pamphlets protesting taxes and explaining their views. Daniel Dulaney the Younger from Maryland wrote this one in 1765.

Keep reading

ChatGPT Helped Transgender Teen Plan School Shooting: 8 Dead

An 18-year-old transgender teenager in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, is alleged to have used AI model ChatGPT in the run-up to a February 10 school shooting that killed eight people, including her mother, her 11-year-old brother, five students and an education assistant, before she took her own life. OpenAI had already flagged and banned one of Jesse Van Rootselaar’s accounts months earlier for “misuses of our models in furtherance of violent activities,” yet did not alert police. According to a civil claim filed in British Columbia, roughly a dozen employees identified the chats as signalling imminent risk, leadership refused to contact law enforcement, but the shooter later opened a second account and continued planning.  

What Happened in Tumbler Ridge?

The massacre began at home. Police said Van Rootselaar killed her mother and sibling before going to a school in Tumbler Ridge, where an educator and five students were shot dead. Two others were hospitalised with serious injuries. Reuters described it as one of Canada’s worst mass killings. Police also said they had previously removed guns from the home and were aware of the teenager’s mental health history. 

That would already be a story of institutional failure. But the AI angle makes it worse. OpenAI later admitted it had banned Van Rootselaar’s ChatGPT account in June 2025 after detecting violent misuse. The company said it considered referring the case to law enforcement, but decided the activity did not meet its threshold because it could not identify “credible or imminent planning.” Months later, eight people were dead. 

OpenAI then told Canadian officials that, under its newer and “enhanced” law-enforcement referral protocol, the same initial account ban would now be referred to police. That is an extraordinary concession. It amounts to an admission that the safeguard in place at the time was inadequate to the risk in front of it. 

The Lawsuit Against OpenAI / ChatGPT

The most serious details now sit inside a civil claim brought by the family of a surviving victim. The filing alleges that Van Rootselaar, then 17, spent days describing gun-violence scenarios to ChatGPT in late spring or early summer 2025. It says the platform’s monitoring system flagged those conversations, routed them to human moderators, and that approximately 12 OpenAI employees identified them as indicating an imminent risk of serious harm and recommended that Canadian law enforcement be informed. The claim alleges leadership refused that request and merely banned the first account. 

The same filing alleges the shooter later opened a second OpenAI account, used it to continue planning a mass-casualty event, and received “mental health counselling and pseudo-therapy” from ChatGPT. It further alleges the chatbot equipped the shooter with information on methods, weapons, and precedents from other mass casualty events. These are allegations, not proven findings, but if they are even broadly accurate, the case is not simply about a product being misused. It is about a company building an intimate, persuasive machine that could flag danger, simulate empathy, and still fail to stop the person it had already flagged. 

The filing also accuses GPT-4o of being deliberately designed in a more human, warmer, more sycophantic style that could foster psychological dependency and reinforce users rather than redirect them. These claims fit a wider concern now being raised by researchers, families, and even some people inside the industry: a chatbot that is rewarded for being agreeable can become dangerous precisely when a human being most needs resistance. 

Keep reading

Court Backs First-Grader in Suit Over School Reaction to ‘Any Life’ Matters Drawing

Can a “schoolyard dispute” warrant federal court intervention? Do first-graders have First Amendment rights? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit just gave a resounding yes to both questions.

The case centers on a first-grader identified in court documents as B.B. After her teacher read a story about Martin Luther King Jr., B.B. drew a picture of her and her multiracial friend group. “Black Lives Mater [sic] any life,” it said. Sweet, right?

Apparently not to the administrators at Viejo Elementary School in California’s Capistrano Unified School District. The school’s principal, Jesus Becerra, spoke with B.B. about her drawing, allegedly telling her that it was inappropriate. According to B.B., she was also barred from recess for two weeks.

B.B.’s mother, Chelsea Boyle, sued, alleging that her daughter’s First Amendment rights had been violated.

A federal district court sided with the school and Becerra, holding that B.B.’s drawing was not protected by the First Amendment. “This schoolyard dispute—like most—does not warrant federal court intervention,” wrote U.S. District Judge David O. Carter in the court’s 2024 opinion.

Now, the 9th Circuit has weighed in and reversed course. “We hold that elementary students’ speech is protected by the First Amendment,” the appeals court ruled, vacating the lower court’s decision and sending the case back for reconsideration.

“Schools may restrict students’ speech only when the restriction is reasonably necessary to protect the safety and well-being of its students,” the 9th Circuit judges wrote.

Keep reading

UK Teacher BANNED For Saying Migrants Should ‘Respect Our Laws Or Leave’ 

A British Physical Education teacher has been indefinitely banned from the classroom after daring to state that migrants should respect Britain’s laws, culture, and way of life — or leave.

Sam Everett taught at Haughton Academy in Darlington for two years. Someone identified his X account, reported him to the school, and triggered an investigation into his political views. 

The independent Teaching Regulation Agency panel that heard the case cleared him of racism and sexism, praised his unblemished teaching record, noted colleague endorsements, and recommended he keep his job. Publication of the findings alone would suffice as punishment, they ruled.

However, the Department for Education stepped in anyway and overruled the panel, claiming it had “failed to give sufficient weight” to the seriousness of his conduct. 

Everett is now banned from teaching for life — or at least two years before he can even apply to be reinstated, with no guarantee of success. He lost his job at the academy in June 2024.

The posts that sparked the witch hunt were hardly fringe. In one, Everett wrote: “Completely agree, if you don’t respect our laws, culture and way of life you should leave, nobody is forcing you to stay. We don’t go to other peoples countries and tell them they’re wrong for how they go about things.”

Responding to a claim that “The law of Allah is superior to your laws,” he replied: “Sick of hearing rubbish being spouted by these idiots. They can live in societies where their values are accepted, it isn’t here. Leave. You won’t be missed.”

Keep reading

Another DEPRAVED Leftist: Many Such Cases

An Oregon high school principal placed on leave for celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk has been sentenced to five years in prison for possession of child abuse material.

Jeremy P. Williams, former head of Rainier Junior-Senior High School, now joins a disturbing list of leftists in education and politics whose public anti-conservative rage masked far darker realities threatening children.

Williams pleaded guilty to three charges of possessing sexually explicit images of minors. He was initially hit with 13 counts after the Cowlitz County Sheriff’s Office received tips from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children on Aug. 28.

He received a five-year prison term, must register as a sex offender for 15 years, and will serve 36 months of community custody upon release. The Rainier School District placed him on administrative leave after his comments celebrating Kirk’s September 2025 assassination, though the exact wording remains undisclosed.

Keep reading

Mother Speaks Out About Daughter’s Targeting by School’s Secret LGBTQ Club

In 2023, Colorado parents sued Poudre School District after discovering sixth-graders were being recruited to a secret after-school “art” club that turned out to be a gender and sexuality awareness club.

In Lee v. Poudre School District R-1, two families, Jonathan and Erin Lee, and Nicolas and Linnaea Jurich, sued the district, alleging it groomed their daughters into the LGBTQ cult through secretive Gender and Sexualities Alliance (GSA) meetings.

The lawsuit was dismissed, and on April 22, 2025, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that dismissal.

When the lawsuit was initially filed, Lee told Fox News’ Harris Faulkner,”The art teacher had invited in an outside presenter into the classroom that day, and this woman did absolutely unthinkable things with the kids.”

The presenter also told students they could describe themselves as “queer” if they had not yet figured out their sexuality.

“She talked to them about polyamory. She told them that these new labels that they had just adopted made them more likely to commit suicide and talked to them extensively about suicide,” she continued.

The presenter also allegedly discussed puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, warning those in attendance that their parents may not be “safe” people to turn to as they struggle with certain identities.

“She [the speaker] runs an organization called ‘Skittles’ for kids five to eleven to discuss gender and sexuality,” Lee said, noting that her daughter’s art teacher pulled her aside and told her “you don’t have to tell your parents.”

Lee joined Grant Stinchfield on Real America’s Voice to share her family’s journey.

Keep reading