Tag: public schools

Woke Virginia school district unleashes wrath on boys ‘who complained about trans kids in changing rooms’

A woke Virginia school district is investigating three boys after they questioned why a trans student was filming them in the male locker room, according to their parents. 

Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) has opened a Title IX probe into the pupils at Stone Bridge High after they said the arrangement made them feel uncomfortable. 

Title IX investigations involve allegations of sex-based discrimination, including sexual harassment, sexual assault, domestic violence, and other violations. 

A father of one of the students said the trans pupil, a biological female who identifies as male, used a mobile phone to record his son and others in the locker room after a gym class in March. 

‘I believe that is an invasion of their privacy,’ he told ABC7. ‘We’re concerned’. 

He said his son is being investigated for ‘questioning why there was a female in the men’s locker room’.

‘Other boys were also uncomfortable with it,’ he added. ‘There were other boys asking the same question. They (LCPS) created a very uncomfortable situation. 

‘They’re young, they’re 15 years old. They’re expressing their opinions, and now they’re being targeted for expressing those opinions.

‘I don’t think my son should be punished for expressing his First Amendment right and being able to ask questions.’

‘I have a daughter that’s in high school as well, and if there was a male in there videotaping her in the locker room, I would have issues,’ he added. 

‘If it’s my son and there’s a female in the locker room videotaping, I have issues. Even if it was somebody of the same sex, I believe that this is an invasion of their privacy.’ 

Keep reading

OUTRAGEOUS: Deranged Maine High School Teacher Calls for Killing President Trump and ALL of His Fans in Series of Incredibly Sick Posts – Remains Employed by Her School

A deranged high school teacher in Maine called for killing Trump and his God-fearing supporters in a bizarre rant. Yet, she remains employed by the school despite her remarks.

As the New York Post reported, Waterville Senior High School English teacher JoAnna St. Germain went on Facebook Tuesday and demanded the Secret Service “coordinate” and kill every single one of Trump’s fans along with the president.

“The Secret Service has the perfect opportunity, if they choose to step up and take it,” she wrote. “You are the ones with the power. Coordinate. Take out every single person who supports Trump’s illegal, immoral, unconstitutional acts.”

Disturbingly, St. Germain also claimed she was “not talking about assassinating a president,” arguing that a president is “a person duly elected by the American people” (Which Trump was). The disturbed individual instead believes that the election does not count because Trump is now “leading a fascist dictatorship.”

“If you step up, we can avoid a civil war,” she ranted. “I’m not talking about assassinating a president. A president is a person duly elected by the American people. “Tr*mp has shamelessly bragged openly about stealing the election.”

“He is making plans to give himself a third term. I’m talking about Americans recognizing a fascist dictatorship and standing against it.”

Of course, St. Germain is such a sick coward that she wants others to suffer for her desire.

“If I had the skill set required, I would take them out myself,” she claimed.

St. Germain made clear that she was well aware she could lose her position for her words against Trump, but continued to portray herself as a “fearless warrior.”

“I posted knowing I’d likely lose my job and benefits,” she wrote. “I’m not backtracking a single thing. I believe Trump and every sycophant he has surrounded himself with needs to die,” she wrote.

The Waterville Public Schools Superintendent, Peter Halle, issued a statement on Wednesday responding to St. Germain’s infuriating remarks. The statement was later shared by the outlet The Maine Wire.

“Please know that I have taken steps to ensure everyone’s safety and am, along with the appropriate authorities, actively investigating the incident,” Hallen wrote.

“While I cannot comment on personal matters, I assure you that due process and the safety of our students and staff are my highest priority,” he added.

Keep reading

Teacher calls for the assassination of Trump, supporters

The latest chapter of leftists and Democrats advocating for violence, even murder, has arrived.

There long have been statements by that community that call for the removal or elimination of President Donald Trump, verbiage that one report called “assassination prep.”

Now an instructor from a school in Maine has turned blunt, with JoAnna St. Germain of Waterville Senior High calling on the Secret Service to kill Trump and his supporters.

On Facebook, she insisted the federal agency “step up” and avoid a civil war by killing Trump and his supporters.

She claimed it would not constitute assassination, since she turned conspiracy theorist with the claim Trump is not a legitimate president “duly elected by the American people.”

She said, “If I had the skill set required, I would take them out myself.”

Keep reading

No, Trump Did Not Just Bring Back Segregation to Schools

Once again, the mainstream media is distorting the facts. Following the Justice Department’s recent dismissal of a decades-old desegregation case in Louisiana, critics rushed to frame the action as a rollback of civil rights or, worse, a return to racial segregation in schools. But the facts do not support this narrative.

In 1966, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit to desegregate schools in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana. The resulting federal consent decree mandated the dismantling of the district’s racially segregated school system.

By 1975, the court found the district had achieved integration. However, the case remained open for decades due to administrative oversight, including the death of the presiding judge, and no formal court action was ever taken to close it.

In April 2025, as part of a broader review of dormant cases, the DOJ under the Trump administration formally moved to dismiss the order.

According to a joint filing with Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, there had been “zero action by the court, the parties or any third-party” in nearly 50 years.

The DOJ’s official press release, titled “Justice Department Dismisses Half Century Old Louisiana Consent Decree,” stated: “No longer will the Plaquemines Parish School Board have to devote precious local resources over an integration issue that ended two generations ago,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon.

For the school district, remaining under the outdated court order meant compiling and submitting annual data to the DOJ on hiring practices, student discipline, and demographics. It imposed a bureaucratic burden on a small district with fewer than 4,000 students.

Local officials described the process as time-consuming and unnecessary, diverting limited staff and resources from more pressing educational needs.

For the DOJ, maintaining the inactive case consumed time and attention that could be better directed toward active civil rights enforcement.

Despite these facts, critics quickly claimed the dismissal would lead to “resegregation.”

Keep reading

Religion Is Not The Only Thing That Should Be Separated From The State

The Act of Supremacy of 1534 declared that King Henry VIII (and his successors) was “the only supreme head in earth of the Church of England” and not the pope of Rome. The Treason Act of 1534 made it an act of treason, under punishment of death, to deny the Act of Supremacy. During the reign of Queen Mary, the daughter of Henry VIII, the Act of Supremacy was repealed, but was enacted by the English Parliament again in 1559 after Henry’s other daughter Elizabeth became the queen. The British monarch is to this very day still the head of the Church of England or Anglican Church, which is the established church in England. This is one of the main differences between the United States and Great Britain. Although the United States has a National Cathedral where some state funerals are held (most recently for Jimmy Carter), it is actually an Episcopal church (part of the worldwide Anglican Communion), not owned or controlled by the federal government. The “separation of church and state” is a hallmark of the American system of government.

The First Amendment

The Constitution was drafted in 1787, ratified in 1788, and took effect in 1789. It established the United States as a federal system of government where the states, through the Constitution, granted a limited number of powers to a central government. The Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments to the Constitution) was ratified by the states in 1791 in response to criticisms of the Constitution by the Anti-Federalists that the Constitution contained no explicit protection of speech, assembly, religion, or the right to bear arms.

The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” It was President Thomas Jefferson who, in an 1802 letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, equated the religion clauses in the First Amendment with the “separation of church and state”:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

That the “separation of church and state” applied to just the federal government is evident by the fact that some of the states still maintained established churches at the time the Constitution was adopted. The phrase was resurrected by Justice Hugo Black in the case of Everson v. Board of Education (1947). But as Mike Maharrey of the Tenth Amendment Center has observed: “The federal government’s use of the First Amendment to prohibit religious displays in local parks, to force the removal of the Ten Commandments from public schools, or to ban prayers in public assemblies would horrify the founding generation.” Massachusetts was the last of the original states to fully disestablish its churches in 1833. The idea of the “separation of church and state” is now enshrined in all state constitutions.

But religion is not the only thing that should be separated from the state. Unfortunately, the very people who talk the loudest about the separation of church and state never call for the separation of anything else from the state.

Keep reading

Trump Admin Investigates Chicago Public Schools For Racial Discrimination

The U.S. Department of Education has launched an investigation into Chicago Public Schools (CPS) for alleged racial discrimination in its “Black Student Success Plan,” which reportedly only focuses on the academic achievement of black students.

The Title VI investigation comes after education advocacy organization Defending Education filed a complaint with the department’s Office for Civil Rights in February. The Education Department’s press release states that the “Black Student Success Plan” deals with “remedial measures only for black students, despite acknowledging that Chicago students of all races struggle academically.”

“Chicago Public Schools have a record of academic failure, leaving students from all backgrounds and races struggling and ill-prepared to meet the challenges and enjoy the rewards of contemporary American life,” Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights, said. “Rather than address its record honestly, CPS seeks to allocate additional resources to favored students on the basis of race. The Trump-McMahon Department of Education will not allow federal funds, provided for the benefit of all students, to be used in this pernicious and unlawful manner.”

“To CPS, I say this: Every American student deserves access to a quality education, and the Trump Administration will fight tirelessly to uphold that ideal and ensure all students are treated equally under law,” he added.

Also in February, the department sent a notice to state education officials that they will no longer be allowed to have programs that exclude people based on race or make race-based hiring decisions, as had become the norm for diversity, equity, and inclusion-crazed school districts. Some states, schools, and left-wing interest groups have attempted to fight the directive.

Chicago is no different, and its Democrat mayor, Brandon Johnson, threatened to sue the Trump administration if it cut its $1.3 billion (about 16 percent of CPS’s annual budget) in federal funding due to the city’s DEI obsession.

The state got involved as well, with the Illinois State Board of Education sending a letter to the Education Department claiming it was in compliance with Title VI and that it really has no idea what the Trump administration means by DEI — the common refrain from left-wing protectors of the ideology, despite the fact that what is meant by “DEI” is well documented.

The state board also has an entire page dedicated to its commitment to the ideology, and CPS has an “Office of Equity” complete with a DEI resource guide.

Keep reading

Three Rogue Judges Block Trump Admin Efforts To Eradicate Discriminatory DEI From Schools

The attempted judicial coup continues apace as three federal district court judges issued directives to stop the Trump administration’s ability to halt federal funding for schools that participate in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) discrimination.

Thursday saw district judges in Maryland, New Hampshire, and Washington, D.C., issue separate sweeping orders to stop some of the major education reforms President Donald Trump was elected to enact.

“Unelected judges, keen to disrupt the President’s efforts to remove color-consciousness from American education have forgotten that the judiciary is the only non-political branch of our tripartite system of government,” Sarah Parshall Perry, vice president and legal fellow at Defending Education, told The Federalist. “Judges that prohibit the Department of Education’s enforcement of its ‘Dear Colleague Letter’ and related civil rights compliance form forget that both are constitutional and a plain-text application of longstanding federal civil rights laws like Title VI.”

“That law specifically conceives that institutions which do not uphold race neutral policies can have their federal funding revoked,” she continued. “Judges are bound to interpret the laws as they read — not as judges wish they read.”

The cases, brought by far-left teachers unions, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and others, were decided by two Trump-appointed judges and one appointee of President Barack Obama. They also came just one day after Trump signed yet another executive order trying to rein in the DEI-caused destruction in schools.

New Hampshire District Judge Landya B. McCafferty, the Obama appointee, claimed that the Department of Education did not properly define DEI in a Feb. 14, 2025, “Dear Colleague Letter,” despite the fact that, as McCafferty herself acknowledges, the letter exhaustively described the insidious ideology.

Keep reading

Supreme Court likely to rule for parental opt-out on LGBTQ books in schools

The Supreme Court on Tuesday was sympathetic to a group of Maryland parents who want to be able to opt their elementary-school-aged children out of instruction that includes LGBTQ+ themes. The parents argued that the local school board’s refusal to give them that choice violates their religious beliefs and therefore their constitutional right to freely exercise their religion. During nearly two-and-a-half hours of oral argument, a majority of the justices seemed to agree with them, with several justices questioning whether there would even be any harm to simply allowing the parents to excuse their children from the instruction. 

The parents in the case have children in the public schools in Montgomery County, which is in the Washington, D.C., suburbs and is one of the most religiously diverse counties in the United States. The parents include Tamer Mahmoud and Enas Barakat, who are Muslim, Melissa and Chris Persak, who are Roman Catholic, and Svitlana and Jeff Roman, who are Ukrainian Orthodox and Roman Catholic. 

In 2022, the county’s school board approved books featuring LGBTQ+ characters for use in its language-arts curriculum. One book describes the story of a girl attending her uncle’s same-sex wedding, for example, while another book, Pride Puppy, tells the story of a puppy that gets lost during a Pride parade. 

The following year, the board announced that it would no longer allow parents to excuse their children from instruction using the LGBTQ-themed storybooks. That prompted the parents in this case to go to federal court, where they argued that the board’s refusal to allow them to opt their children out violated their rights under the First Amendment to freely exercise their religion because it stripped them of their ability to instruct their children on issues of gender and sexuality according to their respective faiths and to control how and when their children are exposed to these issues. 

The lower courts refused to temporarily require the school board to notify the parents when the storybooks would be used and give them a chance to opt their children out of instruction. A federal appeals court reasoned that on the “threadbare” facts before it, the parents had not demonstrated that exposing their children to the storybooks compelled the parents to violate their religion. 

Several justices had questions about what it means for children to be “exposed” to the storybooks. Justice Clarence Thomas asked Eric Baxter – who argued on behalf of the parents – whether the LGBTQ-themed storybooks were merely present in the classroom, or instead actively used as part of the curriculum. 

Keep reading

Fury over school-issued advice that tells 14-year-old boys how to ‘safely choke their girlfriends during sex’

A council-funded sex education PowerPoint shown to teenagers referenced asking for consent before choking a partner.

The material, funded by Bridgend county borough council in south Wales, was shown to pupils studying PSHE lessons at a range of secondary schools. 

Provided by the council’s domestic abuse service, Assia, the PowerPoint, which was seen by The Times, taught children that ‘consent (when it comes to choking during sex) should happen every time sexual choking is an option’.

‘It is never OK to start choking someone without asking them first and giving them space to say no,’ it continued. 

Experts, however, have shared their deep concern at the sex education class which they say is portraying the idea that ‘choking can be done safely’.

‘This is not sex education, this is just advocacy for the porn industry,’ Michael Conroy, the founder of Men at Work, told The Times. 

‘Imagine you are a 14-year-old girl and you have told your boyfriend you don’t want to be choked but then an authority figure comes into school and tells you it is OK.

‘Choking cuts off oxygen to the brain and is incredibly harmful, it can even kill. Most schools will take it on trust that something endorsed by the local authority is OK.  There is a rampant myth that choking can be done safely and is simply another option for a sexual act.’ 

Keep reading

Missouri 13-Year-Old Suspended for Making a Rifle Out of Dr. Pepper Cans

A 13-year-old Missouri middle school student was suspended for sharing a photo of his weekend art project on his private Snapchat account. The student, W.G., and his mother Riley Grunden are now suing the school district, principal, and superintendent for violating W.G.’s constitutionally protected First Amendment right to creative expression and for labeling him a “cyberbully” on his permanent record. 

While at home after school on September 14, 2024, W.G. took a photo on his personal electronic device of Dr. Pepper cans assembled into the shape of a rifle to mimic a social media trend of “can art,” according to the lawsuit filed by Goldwater Institute’s American Freedom Network. He then posted the photo on his personal Snapchat story to share with his friends. The post was accompanied by a trending audio file, titled “Ak47,” which includes a voiceover saying, “This is the famous AK47, with over 50 million manufactured in ten countries, the AK47 is the most popular assault rifle in the world.” 

The following day, W.G.’s mother received a phone call from W.G.’s school principal, who informed her that another parent had reported the Snapchat post and that W.G. would be subject to a search before entering the school premises the next day. The day after the search, Grunden met with the principal, superintendent, and school resource officer, where she and W.G. were told that, even though the superintendent had found “no credible evidence of any danger,” the Snapchat post had “brought fear to other students” and could be interpreted as a “terrorist threat.” As a result, W.G. would receive three days of out-of-school suspension for cyberbullying. Before this incident, W.G. had no history of bullying or cyberbullying. Now, Grunden is suing on behalf of her son’s free expression rights. 

Although adolescent social media and internet use is one of today’s hot topics, the Supreme Court has made it clear that schools do not have the right to punish students for constitutionally protected speech that has no connection to school safety. 

The Court’s 2021 Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. opinion reiterated schools’ limited ability to regulate off-campus speech only when speech materially disrupts the educational environment, and hedged against the temptation to censor all off-campus speech. Rather, the Court warned that “courts must be more skeptical of a school’s efforts to regulate off-campus speech, for doing so may mean the student cannot engage in that kind of speech at all.” Additionally, in the 2023 Counterman v. Colorado opinion, the Court established that speech could only be punished as a “true threat” if the speaker anticipated that the expression would be perceived as threatening. 

Keep reading