• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Teacher loses First Amendment rights

blackjack50 said:
We all know that whoever put her on leave is a liberal. No doubt about it. I hope she demolishes the administration and people lose their jobs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I hope she sues and gets enough money to open her own private school just to watch the liberals go nuts over it....
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
You're forgetting that under Title VI, they have a right to not be harassed. She is a public employee that may be starting a harassment campaign which puts the public school and herself in jeopardy.
Click to expand...

You must have a very low opinion of illegal immigrants to assume that they would attack her at school for supporting this. Why do you think that all illegal immigrants are violent criminals??
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
Sad to think she is a teacher. This would have a negative impact on her job as a public educator. They have a right to suspend her for this behavior.
Click to expand...

They have the right to suspend her for telling people to follow and support the law?
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
This has nothing to do with indoctrination, the DNC or teacher unions. This surely can have a negative impact on her students.
Click to expand...

Oh really? Then why can leftist teachers freely give interviews on national TV promoting violence and also be shown to have committed assault and she hasn't lost her job?
 
Visbek said:
Is it? I'm not so sure.

Like it or not, employers do keep an eye on social media activity. Employees are no longer just individuals; their employers can (and in this case, apparently are) be held accountable by the public for the private activities of employees.

Her comments also suggest that she might call ICE on her own students or their parents, which can certainly be an issue for the school, and may violate school policies, or local or state laws.

The district ought to have a social media policy in place, and it ought to be applied equally. If her comments run afoul of that policy, then she should be suspended. If it didn't, that is a potential issue of improper enforcement of the policy.

This is also not new. People have been held accountable by employers for social media posts for years now. This case dates back to 2010:
Brooklyn Teacher Who Talked Out of School Can Keep Her Job - The New York Times
Click to expand...

Regulating immigration is one of the actual enumerated powers given to the federal government so a state law that contradicts federal law holds no validity.
 
matchlight said:
As an open-minded, truly liberal American, I hope this awful, xenophobic teacher is punished to the full extent of the law for her hating. No one should be allowed to say anything, even on her own time and away from school, that might make another human feel yucky or invalidated. And please, don't any of you constitutional types try to give me a lot of malarkey about the freedom of speech. If your precious constitution says this harridan should be allowed to spew hateful venom like she did, then let's get some judges who will ignore that outdated piece of paper. Get a clue--we no longer live in the age of powdered wigs, with white Xtian men running everything.
Click to expand...
sigh

Craig Deare was appointed by Donald Trump as a National Security advisor. At a private event, Deare allegely criticized the President's policies on Mexico and other parts of Latin America, as well as Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump's involvement in the administration. He was quickly fired. Is that wrong? Should Deare be protected by the 1st Amendment, because he was employed by the government?

Nope.

Citizens have the right to speak freely. Employers also have the right to suspend or terminate employees who make public statements that reflect badly on the employer.

Even as an employee in a public school, teachers do not have unilateral rights to say what they want on social media. If their public statements violate an existing social media policy, or if the school can demonstrate that the speech had an adverse effect, or violated your job duties.
 
Fishking said:
Regulating immigration is one of the actual enumerated powers given to the federal government so a state law that contradicts federal law holds no validity.
Click to expand...
lol

First, she's not a federal employee, and she is not a deputy for ICE. She is a state employee, and enforcing immigration law is not her job.

Second, that's not how federalism actually works. Enforcement of immigration laws is the responsibility of the federal government, not state or municipal governments. I.e. Congress cannot pass a law ordering state employees like teachers to check students for immigration status.

It is true that a state cannot provide a citizen with immigration status, and cannot stop a duly appointed federal agent from doing their job. But they certainly can suspend a teacher if they have violated an established social media policy, or if the teacher is otherwise disruptive, even if what they happen to be saying is anti-immigrant in nature.
 
Visbek said:
Is it? I'm not so sure.

Like it or not, employers do keep an eye on social media activity. Employees are no longer just individuals; their employers can (and in this case, apparently are) be held accountable by the public for the private activities of employees.

Her comments also suggest that she might call ICE on her own students or their parents, which can certainly be an issue for the school, and may violate school policies, or local or state laws.

The district ought to have a social media policy in place, and it ought to be applied equally. If her comments run afoul of that policy, then she should be suspended. If it didn't, that is a potential issue of improper enforcement of the policy.

This is also not new. People have been held accountable by employers for social media posts for years now. This case dates back to 2010:
Brooklyn Teacher Who Talked Out of School Can Keep Her Job - The New York Times
Click to expand...

So what if she calls ICE on students or parents? We have a right to report illegal activity to the government in this society? Are you seriously suggesting that an employer can force an employee to not report behavior to law enforcement?

That is about as clear an example of an employer policy against public interest I can think of.

Even if you read sanctuary city policies, they're carefully worded to say employees cannot do primary immigration enforcement or ask contacts about immigration status, not that employees cannot contact ICE on their own to report.
 
Visbek said:
lol

First, she's not a federal employee, and she is not a deputy for ICE. She is a state employee, and enforcing immigration law is not her job.

Second, that's not how federalism actually works. Enforcement of immigration laws is the responsibility of the federal government, not state or municipal governments. I.e. Congress cannot pass a law ordering state employees like teachers to check students for immigration status.

It is true that a state cannot provide a citizen with immigration status, and cannot stop a duly appointed federal agent from doing their job. But they certainly can suspend a teacher if they have violated an established social media policy, or if the teacher is otherwise disruptive, even if what they happen to be saying is anti-immigrant in nature.
Click to expand...

She didn't say to become self deputized vigilantes chasing down random Latinos and demanding their papers, that would be wrong.

She said if you know of illegal aliens report them to ICE. That's basically like posting if you see someone driving drunk call the state patrol.

Calling 911 when you see a drunk driver does not mean the same thing as pulling a PIT manuver and forcing the driver to undergo a breath test as a non officer
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
You're forgetting that under Title VI, they have a right to not be harassed. She is a public employee that may be starting a harassment campaign which puts the public school and herself in jeopardy.
Click to expand...

So, reporting anyone you suspect is guilty of a crime is harassment, and prohibited under Title VI?
or is being in the USA illegally a unique case?
 
faithful_servant said:
I hope she sues and gets enough money to open her own private school just to watch the liberals go nuts over it....
Click to expand...

That would be awesome. But it won't happen. I feel bad for the kids who are stuck in that bastion of liberal indoctrination.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
americanwoman said:
How do you suspect someone is an illegal immigrant unless you personally know them?
Click to expand...

You don't, unless you do personally know them.

Remember: The issue is not whether or not we should be reporting suspected illegals.
The issue is whether or not a citizen has a right to say we should be reporting suspected illegals.

Your right to free speech does not depend on whether or not I agree with you, and mine doesn't depend on whether or not you agree with me. The issue is free speech, and whether an employer has a right to take that right away.

I say, no, that employer does not have such a right. It is an unalienable right that the government is there to protect, and not to try to infringe.
 
Visbek said:
lol

First, she's not a federal employee, and she is not a deputy for ICE. She is a state employee, and enforcing immigration law is not her job.

Second, that's not how federalism actually works. Enforcement of immigration laws is the responsibility of the federal government, not state or municipal governments. I.e. Congress cannot pass a law ordering state employees like teachers to check students for immigration status.

It is true that a state cannot provide a citizen with immigration status, and cannot stop a duly appointed federal agent from doing their job. But they certainly can suspend a teacher if they have violated an established social media policy, or if the teacher is otherwise disruptive, even if what they happen to be saying is anti-immigrant in nature.
Click to expand...

She's not enforcing anything. She's merely advocating people tip of violators of the law to the proper authorities. A state institution cannot keep someone from doing such.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
You're forgetting that under Title VI, they have a right to not be harassed. She is a public employee that may be starting a harassment campaign which puts the public school and herself in jeopardy.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a fair question. Do you think your office should be checking your Facebook for things they disagree with politically?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
So what if she calls ICE on students or parents? We have a right to report illegal activity to the government in this society? Are you seriously suggesting that an employer can force an employee to not report behavior to law enforcement?
Click to expand...
I'm saying that we don't live in a police state, and she is not a deputy for ICE. Her job is not to make Hispanic or Asian students terrified that they and/or their parents will be reported to la migra.

More importantly, the real question is whether her post violated an existing social media policy.


Even if you read sanctuary city policies, they're carefully worded to say employees cannot do primary immigration enforcement or ask contacts about immigration status, not that employees cannot contact ICE on their own to report.
Click to expand...
Or... not

Here's NYC's latest policy relating to immigration enforcement:
Chancellor Letter on Immigration - Our Schools - New York City Department of Education
As in the past, DOE staff will not ask about or keep a record of the immigration status of a student or family member. If you do share confidential information, including immigration status, about yourself or your family, it will be protected under the City’s confidentiality policy and the Chancellor’s Regulations.

And San Francisco:
SFUSD News Feed: Sanctuary schools
We do not ask for students' immigration status when they enroll, and there are existing laws that help keep your children safe while at school regardless of their immigration status. Furthermore, SFUSD staff will not cooperate with any official seeking information about your children absent a court order.
 
I'm sure someone else brought this up by now but I noticed the FB name was "Cheriese N Jason" which seems to imply she shares the page with her husband/boyfriend. Maybe she admitted to the administration that she posted it, but it could be her husband's post. Either way, teachers more than anyone else, have to be extra careful what they post on social media.
 
blackjack50 said:
Let me ask you a fair question. Do you think your office should be checking your Facebook for things they disagree with politically?
Click to expand...
I've got some bad news for you, my friend. It's well-established that if you make a statement in public, it can be held against you.

Your current employer can fire you based on social media posts, especially if you live in an at-will state. A prospective employer can refuse to hire you based on social media posts, too.
 
Visbek said:
I've got some bad news for you, my friend. It's well-established that if you make a statement in public, it can be held against you.

Your current employer can fire you based on social media posts, especially if you live in an at-will state. A prospective employer can refuse to hire you based on social media posts, too.
Click to expand...

In order for us to determine what is ok and what isn't...you have to ask these questions. So I will ask you: should your employer be allowed to determine your employment based on your personal political statements (that are not extreme)? That isn't exactly an ok thing to do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Visbek said:
sigh

Craig Deare was appointed by Donald Trump as a National Security advisor. At a private event, Deare allegely criticized the President's policies on Mexico and other parts of Latin America, as well as Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump's involvement in the administration. He was quickly fired. Is that wrong? Should Deare be protected by the 1st Amendment, because he was employed by the government?

Nope.

Citizens have the right to speak freely. Employers also have the right to suspend or terminate employees who make public statements that reflect badly on the employer.

Even as an employee in a public school, teachers do not have unilateral rights to say what they want on social media. If their public statements violate an existing social media policy, or if the school can demonstrate that the speech had an adverse effect, or violated your job duties.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your opinion about the freedom of speech of public employees. I doubt that the Supreme Court will agree with you, at least after Justice Gorsuch is sitting on it.
 
Dittohead not! said:
So, reporting anyone you suspect is guilty of a crime is harassment, and prohibited under Title VI?
or is being in the USA illegally a unique case?
Click to expand...

It is very different if she had a concern and privately took care of the situation vs. starting a harassment campaign via Facebook by proclaiming to report any suspicious people to authority. Very different
 
shrubnose said:
If the contract has a conflict with the 1st Amendment I believe that the1st Amendment will win.
Click to expand...

I respectfully think you are wrong. We give up rights alllll the time when we sign contracts. A confidentiality agreement is a pretty clear example. One signs a contract agreeing not to disclose the amount and terms of a lawsuit settlement, for instance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom