We had a similar bill in Arizona which failed adoption by the Senate last month 14-16. I’ll walk you through the key parts of the bill to see how, like Fox News, it claimed fairness and balance while clamping down hard on topics that the right doesn’t want to hear discussed.
Our forbidden concepts section is rather broader:
a) One race, ethnic group or sex is inherently morally or intellectually superior to another race, ethnic group or sex;
b) An individual, by virtue of the individual’s race, ethnicity or sex, is inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;
c) An individual should be invidiously discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of the individual’s race, ethnicity or sex;
d) An individual’s moral character is determined by the individual’s race, ethnicity or sex;
e) An individual by virtue of the individual’s race, ethnicity or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed by other members of the same race, ethnic group or sex;
f) An individual should feel discomfort, guilt anguish or any other form of psychological distress because of the individual’s race, ethnicity or sex; and
g) Academic achievement, meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist or were created by members of one particular race, ethnic group or sex to oppress members of another.
So, going hard after the conservative critical race theory strawman.
But the meat of this is up near the top:
- Prohibits a school district, charter school or state agency (entity) from requiring a teacher, employee or a visitor to discuss controversial issues of public policy or social affairs that are not essential to course learning objectives.
- States that accurate portrayals of historical events, lessons on recognizing and reporting abuse and sex education are not controversial issues.
- Requires a teacher to present issues from diverse and contending perspectives without giving deference to any one perspective, if the teacher chooses to discuss controversial issues.
All nice and cut-and-dried there, right? “Controversial”, “not essential”, “accurate”, “diverse and contending”. Everyone can agree on what these things mean. Not.
But I’m sure if a teacher steps over the (bright, red) line, it can be handled internally with an apology and some better understanding of what the law is really about, right?
- Allows the court, for each violation, to impose a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 per person, plus any amount of misused monies from the entity budget, against a person who knowingly violates or aids the violation of the prohibition on controversial issues.
- States that any person who is responsible for adopting curriculum in violation of the prohibition on controversial issues is responsible for paying all civil penalties and misuse of monies.
- Prohibits school district monies or insurance payments from being used to pay these civil penalties or misused monies.
- Allows the AG to bring an action to recover monies against a teacher, administrator, employee of a school district or charter school or state employee whose violation of the prohibition of controversial issue resulted in an illegal use of public monies.
So a teacher that steps a toe over the line can be assessed $5000 plus however much it cost for this entire judicial process to play out.
Note that you can see this bill’s text, along with its legislative history, at SB1532 | Arizona 2021 | county transportation planning assistant | TrackBill
The bill started out as a way to penalize teachers for enlisting students to help with lobbying, sickouts, etc. on their behalf, which to me is less of a cut-and-dried issue.
But as a way of curtailing classroom discussion of darn near anything that might cause a student to have a bad case of the feels, by threatening the teachers of Arizona via their wallets, it’s a masterpiece.