America’s Red Green Education System

It has become increasingly apparent that the “Red” (Communists, Socialists, Progressives, etc.) and “Green” (Islamic activists, Jihadists, etc.) are collaborating effectively against the “Right” (Constitutionalists, Conservatives, Nationalists, etc.) on political and cultural issues. What is not as well-known, but is at least as troubling, is the collaboration they exhibit in the accreditation of each other’s schools.

According to the U.S. Department of Education “Accreditation in the United States is a voluntary, nongovernmental process, in which an institution and its programs are evaluated against standards for measuring quality.” The Department further states that “The U.S. Department of Education does not have the authority to accredit private or public elementary or secondary schools, and the Department does not recognize accrediting bodies for the accreditation of private or public elementary and secondary schools.”[1]

It is important here to note that this leaves the accreditation (whether termed “Registered”, “Recognized” or otherwise designated) completely up to the state or county education/school entity. This local independence, a deliberate feature of the U.S. educational system, nevertheless here in the context of mutually-reinforcing, reciprocal accreditation by identifiably “Red” and “Green” accreditation organizations, gives rise to concern.

Although there are numerous other organizations involved in Pre-K-12 educational accreditation, such as the Montessori Association[2]and International Baccalaureate (IB) program[3], the primary “Red” accreditation organization is “AdvancED”.[4]AdvancED was formed through a 2006 merger of the Pre-K-12 divisions of the North Central Association Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement (NCA CASI) and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement (SACS CASI)—and expanded through the addition of the Northwest Accreditation Commission (NWAC) in 2012.

AdvancED states that it comprises “the largest community of education professionals in the world” and that it is “non-profit and non-partisan”.[5]The organization also states that “Combining the knowledge and expertise of a research institute, the skills of a management consulting firm and the passion of a grassroots movement for educational change, we serve as a trusted partner to 36,000 educational institutions—employing more than four million educatorsand enrolling more than 20 million students—across the United States and 70 other nations.”[6]

When AdvancED accredits a “non-public school,” that evaluation is based on four elements, one of which is “Cultural Competence”. It states that this is established by “staffing the team with a critical mass of individuals who have understanding and experience with the cultural realities existing in any given school. Cultural competence can be mission specific as in the case of independent schools, special purpose schools or faith-based schools, such as Christian, Catholic, Islamic, Lutheran, etc. Cultural competence also is related to school type and school location such as K-12, elementary, middle, high school, post-secondary, distance education, corporation, career technical, Department of Defense, boarding, day, single sex, or international schools in Latin America, Asia, Middle East and Europe.”[7]

AdvancED further states that “The observations and evidential insights provided through cultural competence of team members are experiential and intuitive. Written evidence provided to the team that is mission specific or culturally relevant, while valuable, is practically irrelevant in the hands of a culturally incompetent team. The cultural competence of the team is one of the most critical components needed to experience a transformational visit for the school.”[8]

While AdvancED in and of itself accomplishes a necessary mission in the accreditation of educational institutions, the concern arises when realizing that the field of U.S. academia long has been dominated by leftist, Marxist, and Progressive influences. This is especially true at the college and university level. That “Cultural Competence” is one of the four elements AdvancED uses to accredit “non-public schools” inevitably does give rise to legitimate concern about the pervasive spread of just such influences across the entirety of the U.S. educational system.

On the “Green” side, there are several organizations that accredit U.S. Islamic schools (or madrassas), which are often attached to Islamic Centers that include a mosque and other facilities. Primary among these is the Council of Islamic Schools in North America (CISNA).[9]

CISNA was formed at an educational symposium hosted by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) in 1989. ISNA is one of the largest Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the country and was named by the Department of Justice an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation HAMAS terror funding trial.

CISNA describes its mission as follows:[10]

  • Its vision is “To be a leading and unifying organization striving for the advancement of Islamic schools and Islamic education respectively.”
  • Its structure is “an association of Islamic schools and educational organizations working to improve Islamic schools through accreditation, consultation, and professional development; advocating for Islamic education; and fostering professional relationships with educational institutions and agencies relevant to Islamic education.”
  • Its goals are to:
    • Promote Islamic schools and Islamic education on a global level
    • Provide accreditation services
    • Provide professional development at a global level
    • Foster professional relationships among Islamic schools and other organizations
    • Provide consulting services relevant to Islamic education

CISNA has accredited a total of 31 Islamic schools across the U.S.,[11] most of which are also accredited through AdvancED. This conveniently reciprocal accreditation arrangement—between AdvancED, the leading (and decidedly leftist-leaning) accreditation authority in the U.S., and ISNA, one of the most influential Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the country—surely must give rise to at least a measure of concern.

CISNA is currently in close collaboration with ISNA to plan its 20thAnnual Education Forum in April 2019 with the theme of “Integrating Social Justice in Islamic Education”.[12]

Islamic Schools League of America (ISLA)[13]

ISLA was founded in 1998 by four parents whose own children received an education in a U.S. Islamic school. Their satisfaction with that Islamic education and a desire to see Islam-based schooling expand in the U.S. led to an interest in the general condition of Islamic K-12 education across the country. A year of research convinced the parents that the status of Islamic education nationwide was encouraging because Islamic schools were expanding rapidly in Muslim communities across the country.

Today, ISLA serves as a non-profit advocacy hub to promote Islamic education in the U.S. It works with educators, organizations, parents, and universities around the U.S. to provide professional pedagogical training, offer educational resources, and facilitate networking among Islamic educational institutions in the U.S. ISLA also accredits Islamic schools (41 to date), some of which have received additional accreditation from other organizations such as AdvancED.[14]

The ISLA Facebook page[15]shows girls from a very young age as well as female teaching staff completely covered in hijabs and enveloping robes, links to ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) and CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations), both Brotherhood front groups, Zaytuna College (a Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamic university in Berkeley, CA) and an ad for Shariah Compliant Financing (SCF), all problematic indicators. The ISLA Twitter page[16]is similarly troubling, with multiple links to Nation of Islam and Malcom X, SCF, more little girls in hijabs, and links to AdvancED and CISNA.

Conclusion

CISNA was formed directly by ISNA, a Muslim Brotherhood front group. ISLA may be somewhat more independent, but still openly displays its Brotherhood connections and shariah-adherent identity. Also, like CISNA, there is significant overlap between it and AdvancED in accreditation and a more limited overlap with CISNA. Whether this could indicate that CISNA is targeting ISLA or vice versa for absorption is not clear. The concern, though, arises because of the interlinked and mutually legitimizing relationships among educational accreditation organizations here identified as respectively, leftist and jihadist in nature.

Whether that veneer of legitimacy is warranted or not is the question, at a time when a traditional American curriculum that focuses on traditional subject matter but also encourages civic responsibility and patriotism seems on the wane. In view of the indoctrinating influence the Progressive left has inflicted on the U.S. educational system over the last century, to see now the expansion of a jihadist influence within American academia that is not only openly affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood but operating in collaboration with that hard-core left is deeply disturbing.

COLUMN BY

Timothy White

Timothy White has been affiliated with American law enforcement and military for over thirty years. He has trained and advised several agencies in law enforcement, criminal intelligence, counter-insurgency and other related fields. He is currently advising a government agency in modernizing their law enforcement and criminal intelligence program.

REFERENCES:

[1]https://www2.ed.gov/students/prep/college/diplomamills/accreditation.html

[2]https://amshq.org/

[3]https://www.ibo.org/

[4]AdvancED website: https://www.advanc-ed.org/

[5]https://www.advanc-ed.org/about-us

[6]Ibid

[7]AdvancED website: https://www.advanc-ed.org/

[8]https://www.advanc-ed.org/source/advanced-accreditation-embraces-cultural-relevancy

[9]Council of Islamic Schools in North America (CISNA) website: https://www.cisnausa.org/

[10]CISNA website, About tab: https://www.cisnausa.org/about-us/

[11]https://www.cisnausa.org/accreditation/accreditation-process/locate-a-school/

[12]http://www.isna.net/education-forum/

[13]https://theisla.org/

[14]https://theisla.org/membership/member-schools/

[15]https://www.facebook.com/theisla/

[16]https://twitter.com/theisla?lang=en

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column with images is republished with permission.

Student gov VP faces calls to RESIGN after political Facebook post

  • A student leader at Emporia State University in Kansas faced impeachment and is now facing calls to resign after using the phrase “illegal alien.”
  • The student leader told Campus Reform on Monday that she will not cave in to those demands because she is committed to a “diverse” campus.

A student leader at Emporia State University in Kansas used the phrase “illegal alien” on her personal Facebook page and is now facing a wave of backlash, including calls for her to resign from her student government position.

Prior to Election Day on Nov. 6, Michaela Todd, vice president of the student government a staunch supporter of Kansas gubernatorial candidate Kris Kobach, posted a message of support for her candidate of choice. In it, she described how she believed Kobach was the best choice because of his views on abortion, taxes, and illegal immigration.

“Put Kansas first, not illegal aliens. The millions of dollars spent on public welfare for illegal aliens in Kansas hurts Kansas taxpayers every single day.”    

“Put Kansas first, not illegal aliens,” Todd wrote. “The millions of dollars spent on public welfare for illegal aliens in Kansas hurts Kansas taxpayers every single day.”

But the phrase “illegal alien” didn’t sit well with some students, who took screenshots and shared them across social media, calling Todd’s comments “racist” and “ignorant.”

“It has come to our attention that the VP of @EmporiaStateASG has made incredibly hurtful, racist, and, frankly, ignorant remarks,” the Multicultural Greek Council at ESU tweeted Wednesday, adding that Todd “does not represent us and we hope that @EmporiaState takes the measures needed to show us that she does not represent ESU either.”

“I am so disgusted at the fact the VP of @EmporiaStateASG promotes these racist and revolting ideas,” another student tweeted.

And Kayla Gilmore, whose Facebook profile lists her as an Emporia State University alumna who now works for the college, posted on Facebook, calling on student leaders to “hold themselves accountable” and for the administration to “hold them accountable should they fail.”

Following the backlash, Todd told Campus Reform that she edited her post and removed the phrase “illegal alien.”

“After I heard that there were some of my constituents who were upset with what I posted, I edited it and took out the part that had the term in it,” the student leader told Campus Reform. “I left the rest of the post there, though. It was a caption to go along with my updated profile picture, which had a Kobach banner on it, which is why I think people who weren’t my friend on Facebook were able to see it. I didn’t realize that was possible.”

But the backlash didn’t stop there.

The ESU Bulletin student newspaper reported Thursday that the student senate tried but failed to impeach Todd over her remarks. The paper also reported that ASG’s Diversity and Inclusion Committee is now calling for Todd to resign.

In a statement to Campus Reform on Monday, Todd made clear that resigning is not her plan.

“I was apologetic to the students who[m] my post [a]ffected negatively because I never want to inflict pain on others,” she said. “Now, I am still dedicated to representing the ESU students. I am not going to step down because I am committed to creating a diverse campus at ESU, not only in culture but in thought as well.”

Emporia State University did not respond to a request for comment in time for publication.

COLUMN BY

Jon Street

JON STREET

News Editor

Jon Street is a news editor for Campus Reform. Six years ago, Jon cut his reporting teeth fresh out of college as an intern at Media Research Center’s CNSNews.com, where he interviewed multiple members of Congress and former presidential candidates. From there, he went on to complete a stint at Watchdog.org, where his exclusive, investigative work was picked up or cited by the New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News, National Review, and the Drudge Report, among others. More recently, Jon spent three years as an assistant editor at TheBlaze.com. In his free time, Jon enjoys trying new coffeehouses around the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area and traveling back to his home state of Missouri to spend time with his family.

RELATED  ARTICLES:

UC Berkeley group disavows own student senator over conservative Christian views

EXCLUSIVE: Berkeley student senator disavowed over Christian beliefs responds to calls to RESIGN

VIDEO: Calif College Republicans’ signs stolen

Cornell lecture to focus on ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’ in Trump era

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Can Students Name One Good Thing Trump Has Done?

Can Colorado State University students name one Donald J. Trump accomplishment? You might be surprised!

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images and video is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Leftist Books For Brainwashing Kids

Will Witt reads a book that encourages children to be activists. Check it out!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Brainwashing Our Best and Brightest Against Our Own Country

West Virginia: ClimateDepot’s Marc Morano loses effort to stop brainwashing of children on Climate Change

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images and video is republished with permission.

Student arrested, charged with battery after confrontation with College Republicans

  • Florida State University police arrested and charged a student who allegedly assaulted at least one College Republican at a tabling event.
  • The student, Shelby Anne Shoup, threw her drink on at least one College Republican member and kicked over a sign.

Police at a Florida university have arrested a student who allegedly assaulted at least one College Republican, according to a Friday announcement.

Florida State University police arrested FSU student Shelby Anne Shoup after the release of a viral video in which Shoup threw her drink at a College Republican and kicked over a Ron DeSantis campaign sign.

“I hope you all realize that you are normalizing and enabling Nazis,” she said. “And you can film me, I don’t give a shit.”    

[VIDEO: Instructor arrested for attacking conservative students]

The College Republicans tabled Tuesday to educate students about the importance of voting in the midterm elections when Shoup confronted them.

“You are supporting Nazis,” the student said. “Do you know that?”

“You’re supporting communism?” a bystander asked Shoup, pointing to a pin worn by the student, which appears to depict a sickle and hammer.

“Yeah, I fucking am,” Shoup responded. “Fuck you, man.”

“Don’t pour your coffee on me,” the bystander said.

“Fuck you, I will,” Shoup said, tossing the contents of her drink, which she subsequently claimed was chocolate milk, onto the bystander. “Fuck all of you.”

“I hope you all realize that you are normalizing and enabling Nazis. And you can film me, I don’t give a shit. Listen here: eleven of my people are fucking dead this weekend,” she continued, referencing the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre.

“Two black people are dead in Kentucky because of fucking nationalist murderers that this normalizes,” she added, referencing the Louisville Kroger store shooting.

Shoup kicked a sign promoting Fla. Republican gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis while leaving the scene.

FSU College Republicans Vice Membership Chair Daisy Judge commented on the incident to Campus Reform.

“While handing out Trump stickers to two students, I was brashly approached by two students insinuating that we were racists for supporting  President Trump,” Judge told Campus Reform. “This escalated into the students implying that we were responsible for the shooting that occurred in Pittsburgh. The female student threw her chocolate milk on me after stating that the Republican Party and myself were Nazis for who[m] we aligned ourselves with.”

[RELATED: Female student attacked for wearing Trump hat on campus]

“As she continued to voice her opinion, she once again threw her drink on me while I continued to remain civil and explain our stance,” the vice membership chair said. “As others approached to de-escalate the situation, she threw the remainder of her drink on someone else [at the beginning of the video] due to them pointing out that she supported the Communist party. The girl then went on to hit a passing by student and to kick down our DeSantis sign.”

“FSU is a diverse community that values and respects each person,” the school posted on Twitter Friday. “FSU expects each member of the community to embrace the values of civility and ethical conduct and obey the law. Regarding Tuesday’s incident, the individual was identified, arrested and charged with battery.”

COLUMN BY

Genesis Sanchez

GENESIS SANCHEZ

Florida Campus Correspondent

Genesis Sanchez is a Florida Campus Correspondent, and reports liberal bias and abuse on campus for Campus Reform. She studies at Tallahassee Community College and serves as a Contributing Editor at The Lone Conservative. Twitter: @GenSanchezz.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Socialist students: ‘Free’ tuition would stimulate economy

College heads urge Betsy DeVos to ‘do everything you can’ to halt proposed Title IX changes

Email to students gives voting ‘recommendations’

Mich State student gov denies, then approves, ‘Israel Week’ funding

School Police Show Up At Door Of Transgender Policy Critic

A parent who sent an email critical of the Florida school superintendent who implemented a radical transgender policy that strips away parent rights, found officers from the school district’s brand new police force at his door the next day.

This is a fairly shocking level of intimidation, and certainly at least some parents must have got the message: Shut up, sit down and let us handle your children. Or else we may come knocking.

We wrote about this radical policy last week, but confess we did not see this tactic coming. The essentials are this:

At the recommendation of the Sarasota County School District’s LGBTQI Task Force, School Superintendent Todd Bowden issued “guidelines” to govern how the district’s more than 50 public schools handle transgender and gender questioning students — starting as young as kindergarten. This stealthy radicalization of local policy comes just as the Trump administration considers rolling back the Obama administration’s un-scientific and lawless expansion of Title IX.

The Sarasota County school guidelines implement a full-blown transgender protocol allowing students to use whichever bathroom and locker room corresponds with the gender with which they “identify;” and forces everyone else to use the pronoun of the students’ choice. But maybe the biggest affront is that the guidelines also say that parents can not be informed of their child’s decision to identify as a different gender, because some trans activists claim the schools are a “safer” environment than the home.

It was keeping it secret from the parents, along with the general egregiousness of the rest of the policy, that attracted a lot of controversy. A 31-year-old Sarasota father of a young child not yet in the school system, sent the superintendent a brief email criticizing the guidelines.

“If Sarasota County schools will not keep my daughter safe from mentally ill male students who want to use the same bathroom as my daughter then I will. Listen very clearly, if/when something happens to little girls at school by transgender males exposing themselves in bathrooms/locker rooms or worse, you will be held liable. See you around.”

The superintendent decided that being “held liable” or maybe “see you around” was a physical threat and went to the school police about it. Of course, the letter-writer is right. The superintendent is totally liable, or responsible, because he bypassed both the School Board and the public in making the decision. That level of authoritarian action would seem to expose him to legal liability, which is the obvious point the father was making.

The twist is that the school district is still in the process of building its brand new internal police force — one of very few in Florida — in the wake of the Parkland shootings last year and hasty Florida legislation passed under the pressure of emotional activism. That means this particular superintendent, with his apparent tendencies, now has a quasi-personal police force. No one wants to think he would possibly use it in such a way, but it is not out of line with his heavy-handed tactics.

So while the letter-writing father was at work, his wife called him to say that two school district police officers showed up at their house. It’s not clear, but apparently the officers do not even have any jurisdiction off school property. They said they were there about the email.

That’s a scary situation for anyone, and certainly a parent. To their professional credit, once the father showed them the email, they realized there was nothing to it and apologized for being there. However, it turns out that school police were also at the letter writer’s father’s house, questioning him and his neighbors.

Of course nothing came of it because there was nothing there in the first place — nothing to it except to display a classic intimidation move from a Superintendent that has a bit of a reputation for playing hardball and intimidating others — including school board members who he supposedly answers to.

It’s safe to say that the message has been received by other parents who are uncomfortable with boys being allowed in the bathroom and locker room with their daughters at school, and are very uncomfortable with their Johnny being Sue at school and the school keeping that information from them and accommodating Johnny as Sue.

The message? Keep your mouth shut.

University of Denver hosts ‘White Privilege Symposium’

  • The University of Denver is hosting a variety of workshops as part of the annual “White Privilege Symposium.”
  • Workshops offered include “White Accountability” and “Colored White: A Discussion On White Identity.”

The University of Denver will host and sponsor the annual “White Privilege Symposium,” (WPS) which is set up to “examine patterns, cultures, and systems that contribute to identity, power, and privilege,” on Friday and Saturday.

The symposium will feature breakout sessions such as “Anti-Racist Allyship: Avoiding The Pitfalls,” “Colleagial Check-In for POC: Needing Connection While Managing Whiteness,” “Colored White: A Discussion On White Identity,” “White Accountability,” and more, according to the symposium website,

“How are folks engaged in this work really problematizing their own white fragility, defensiveness, tokenization of POC, etc., and how can you become an even better ally/accomplice?”

“Helping white people understand the difference between accountability and blame and challenging white people to use this knowledge to check their own white [privilege] and to dismantle the systems of racism that permeate this country,” is the stated purpose of the session.

Another workshop titled “Similar but Separate” seeks to explain the difference between black and brown women to the audience.

“We will explain the differences of black and brown women in Colorado,” that description states. “Many people believe black and brown women experience the same inequalities; however we do not.”

The “Anti-Racist Allyship: Avoiding the Pitfalls” workshop even criticizes the “good progressive or liberal” who considers themselves an “anti-racist ally.”The description asks progressives and liberals, “what happens when you are challenged, to think of yourself and your work differently?”

“Quite often, POC find ourselves disappointed, shocked, and saddened by how frequently the ‘ally,’ especially the white ally, reveals themselves to be anything but,” it explains. “How are folks engaged in this work really problematizing their own white fragility, defensiveness, tokenization of POC, etc., and how can you become an even better ally/accomplice?”

When Campus Reform asked the University of Denver what the university is doing to sponsor the program, the school said it is letting the WPS use university space. If members of the community disagree with the content in the symposium, they are encouraged to come and discuss the issue, the school told Campus Reform.

“The University of Denver brings together people and communities with diverse and opposing viewpoints and we invite members of our community to engage in civil discourse regardless of subject. We strive to create an inclusive environment that fosters the intellectual growth of our students, alumni, and the greater, global community,” the school told Campus Reform. “Within that environment, we encourage each individual to engage in respectful discourse and the critical examination of ideas. Freedom of expression is crucial to the mission of the University of Denver.”

The UD Graduate School of Social Work is sponsoring the WPS as well as The University of Colorado-Denver.

COLUMN BY

Adam Sabes

ADAM SABES

Mississippi Senior Campus Correspondent

Adam Sabes is Mississippi Senior Campus Correspondent, and reports liberal bias and abuse on campus for Campus Reform. He is a junior at Mississippi State University, where he is majoring in Journalism. He also contributes to Red Alert Politics.

RELATED ARTICLES:

CUNY cuts class calling for ‘Abolition of Whiteness’

Profs claim scientific objectivity reinforces ‘whiteness’

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

UMich hosts anti-Israel activists two days after synagogue massacre

  • The University of Michigan hosted an event featuring speakers supporting divestment from Israel two days after a massacre which claimed the lives of 11 individuals at a Jewish synagogue.
  • UMich’s College Republicans chapter demanded that the school apologize for hosting the event, but the Arabic and Islamic culture professor who hosted it called the claim that BDS is anti-Semitic “patently false.”

The University of Michigan hosted a town hall comprised entirely of anti-Israel speakers on Monday, just two days after the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre left 11 people dead, the worst anti-Semitic attack in American history.

UMich billed the event as a “teach-in town hall” explaining “what is BDS? And why does it matter?” The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement calls for an end to international support of Israel’s “oppression of Palestinians.”

“What is fair and just, in light of our diverse histories: members of the U-M community recall boycotts of Jewish businesses in Nazi Europe, America’s history of civil rights boycotts, and boycotts in response to Palestinian displacement under Israeli Occupation?” the event description asks.

The town hall event announcement listed several prominent celebrities, including the singer Lorde, who canceled their events in protest of Israel.

UMich’s Arab and Muslim American Studies department, Department of Women Studies, Conflict and Peace Initiative; Colonialism, Race, and Sexualities Initiative; Department of American Culture, and the Middle Eastern Law Students Association (MELSA) were among the entities that funded the event.

Anti-Israel activists Susan Abulhawa, Tom Pessah, and Huwaida Arraf spoke at the event.

Abulhawa, a novelist, tweeted in 2013, “How many times must we become refugees? Why? So every American and European Jew can have dual citizenship?”

Pessah is a former board member of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at UC Berkeley, according to CanaryMission.org. As a student, he authored a BDS resolution encouraging the UC Board of Regents to end its association with any “American companies materially and militarily supporting the Israeli government’s occupation of the Palestinian territories.”

Pessah has also praised a hunger strike led by Marwan Barghouti. The Palestinian Authority and Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, groups which Barghouti has led and founded, respectively, have conducted terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens.

Arraf, meanwhile, is a co-founder of International Solidarity Movement (ISM), which aims to resist “the long-entrenched and systematic oppression and dispossession of the Palestinian population, using non-violent, direct-action methods and principles.”

The ISM has been accused of providing material support to terrorists. Arraf, himself, once co-authoreda piece claiming that “the Palestinian resistance must take on a variety of characteristics — both nonviolent and violent.”

UMich’s Monday event came two days after a gunman opened fire at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, killing 11 people. The Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish organization that fights anti-semitism, says the attack: “is the deadliest attack on the Jewish community in the history of the United States.”

Dylan Berger, President of the College Republican chapter at UMich, told Campus Reform that the university should apologize for hosting the BDS event.

“Our College Republicans community is devastated by the heinous attack in Pittsburgh,” Berger said. “It’s incomprehensible to imagine that someone would want to gun down innocent people in a place of worship. It’s an attack on the very essence of America. Unfortunately, this attack is indicative of the rising tide of anti-Semitism all over the country.”

“The University of Michigan, in particular, has seen a culture of anti-Semitism arise with a vengeance,” he told Campus Reform. “The BDS Movement is at the center of the rising tide of anti-Semitism on campus. Make no mistake: an economic war against Israel is modern-day anti-Semitism.”

“While those who support this movement should have a right to espouse their views, the event in question should have been canceled,” Berger continued. “It was wildly inappropriate to hold a BDS event mere days after such a vile anti-Semitic attack. College Republicans stand in solidarity with the Jewish Community on campus. The university should apologize for holding this event.”

The event was organized by UMich’s Center for Middle Eastern & North African Studies (CMENAS), an entity directed by Samer Mahdy Ali. Ali, who also serves as an Arabic and Islamic culture professor at UMich, commented on the event to Campus Reform.

CMENAS “did in fact host a BDS event on Monday, and we did, in fact, consider canceling it, but we decided to proceed with the event with substantial modifications to acknowledge and integrate the horrific events of the Shabbat massacre,” Ali said. “Many of our Jewish friends from Hillel attended the BDS event, along with Jewish and Israeli left students affiliated with Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow and the Israeli organization Boycott from Within.”

Ali termed the claim that BDS is anti-Semitic “patently false.”

“BDS opposes the apartheid laws and policies that oppress millions of Palestinians as well as Israelis who are dark-skinned, such as Yemeni, Mizrahi, and Ethiopian Jews,” he told Campus Reform. “There is nothing inherently Jewish about oppression. Israel in its current form stands in violation of post-WWII international norms, International Law, and the Geneva Convention. It has been characterized as “an apartheid state” by Nobel Peace Laureates Jimmy Carter and Desmond Tutu, among others, because of racist laws and policies toward the indigenous population. Our event shows that many Jews and Palestinians and their allies want a more just and hopeful future for all.”

UMich punished in October a pro-BDS professor who refused to write a recommendation for a student intending to study abroad because that student wanted to study in Israel.

The BDS movement expands well beyond the University of Michigan.  Students at Barnard University voted earlier this year to demand the school end its ties with eight allegedly pro-Israel companies.

“Schools that are promoting BDS or other kinds of anti-Zionist rhetoric…are three to eight times more likely to have incidents that target Jewish students for harm,” Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, a lecturer at the University of California, Santa Cruz said in 2014. “These have included assault, the suppression of speech, and destruction of property.”

COLUMN BY

Autumn Price

AUTUMN PRICE

Virginia Campus Correspondent

Autumn Price is a Virginia Campus Correspondent, and reports liberal bias and abuse on campus for Campus Reform. She is a law student at Liberty University School of Law.

RELATED ARTICLES:

UMich punishes prof who denied Israel recommendation

UMich caves after DOJ calls speech policies ‘unconstitutional

Anti-Trump UMich protesters use ‘privileged folx’ as shield

College: Prof’s refusal to write Israel letter ‘disappointing’

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is a screengrab: YouTube/KDKA-TV.

2018 MIDTERMS: What’s At Stake?

Midterm elections are normally as exciting as watching grass grow. A handful of people usually show up to elect dog catchers and the like. Democrats tend to avoid it like the plague, failing to see the significance of it in comparison to a presidential election. However, in the Age of Trump and the Resistance, the 2018 midterm elections have been electrified and we may very well see some record voting numbers for such an election. This, of course, represents a bonanza for the news media who reaps the financial harvest by whipping the populace into a frenzy.

The media is quick to tell us the party in power normally loses during a midterm election. I would remind them, these are unusual times and we have a President who doesn’t play by their rules and is only interested in results, not history.

Elections are meters of our morality. This is where we collectively determine what direction we would like to see the country go. It defines our priorities and values; what is right and what is wrong. To illustrate:

COURTS

This election will determine what kind of Supreme Court we want: Republicans want justices to interpret the Constitution, and Democrats want them to enact law from the bench. Whereas the former is perceived as conservative, the latter represents a liberal approach. This also applies to the Federal benches as well.

This same phenomenon applies to State Supreme Courts. For example, in Florida three vacancies are awaiting to be filled. Should Democrat Andrew Gillum win the governor’s race, the three justices will likely be liberal; should Republican Ron DeSantis win, the justices will take a conservative approach.

This aspect alone is highly significant to the midterm elections. In terms of morality, should justices simply interpret law, or pave the way for new laws outside of the scope of the Constitution?

CONSTITUTION

The midterms will also have an impact on the mechanisms embedded in the U.S. Constitution. For example, Democrats want to eliminate the Electoral College and rely totally on the popular vote to decide the victor of presidential elections. On the other hand, the Republicans want to keep the Electoral College “as is” in order to maintain parity between urban and rural America. From a moral standpoint, which is the fairest approach? Should the Electoral College be eliminated, the interests of rural America will be neglected, causing candidates to only focus on the needs of urban areas.

Another area under consideration is the eligibility to vote. Whereas Republicans want all legal citizens to vote, Democrats want to give illegal immigrants and criminals the right to vote. There is also discussion regarding the lowering of the voting age to 16. The question is, what kind of person should be allowed to vote?

THE RULE OF LAW

Some people believe the law should be applied equally to everyone. Others believe exceptions should be granted, that some people are above the law. Republicans believe a person is “innocent until proven guilty” and there should not be a double-standard that allows otherwise (“guilty until proven innocent”). To enforce this, there should be “due process” to entitle citizens to fair and consistent treatment under the law.

The Rule of Law includes Amendment I of the Bill of Rights whereby Congress shall make no law prohibiting “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Peaceably is the keyword here. This certainly doesn’t support the concept of anarchy as advocated by some people in this country today.

So, the moral question becomes, do we believe in adhering to the Rule of Law, or do we prefer mob rule?

SOCIOECONOMICS

The United States was founded as a free enterprise system which is an economic system where government places few restrictions on the types of business activities or ownership by citizens. This is based on the concept of Capitalism which is a celebration of the individual’s right to try and succeed, requiring a sense of risk. In contrast, the Democrats are embracing Socialism which concentrates on the rights of the group overall, controlled by government, thereby suppressing individual initiative and risk. Unlike Capitalism which allows for failure, there is no such sense of loss in Socialism, nor sense of victory. Essentially, everyone receives a trophy, win or lose. The two socioeconomic programs are as different as night and day, and are simply incompatible.

Under Capitalism, the individual is entitled to enjoy the fruits of his/her labor, such as financial rewards. This is an important benefit derived from risk. Under Socialism, there is no such concept, and instead of the individual benefiting, the wealth is evenly distributed to the work force, regardless if they earned it or not. In other words, a weak worker benefits at the same rate as a strong worker.

Democrat Socialists believe in free entitlements for everyone, such as college education, food and housing, transportation, health care, and jobs. This may sound enticing, but they have no clue as to how to pay for all of this other than higher taxes, thereby causing a redistribution of the wealth, which is anti-Capitalist.

The moral question thereby becomes, which system should America embrace? Republicans defend Capitalism, Democrats prefer Socialism.

GLOBALIZATION VS. NATIONALISM

This election is also about adopting a position of Globalization or Nationalism. Globalization, as supported by Democrats, involves the cultural integration of trade, capital, and immigration among the countries of the world. This tends to force countries to lose their identity and become subservient to others. Consequently, we are seeing a push back in the form of Nationalism as in President Trump’s policy of “America First,” and “Brexit,” representing the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union.

Nationalism respects the sovereignty of a country, meaning their ability to manage their own affairs independently. Globalization loosens these restrictions to promote equality of nations and cultures, a form of Socialism. Nationalism respects the rights of the citizen, Globalization respects the rights of everyone, regardless where they are from. Consequently, this has led to the immigration problems plaguing the United States and Europe. In a nutshell, it means caring for anyone crossing our borders. Whereas under Nationalism, immigrants must lawfully apply to be accepted, respect the rule of law, and adapt to society, Globalization is just the reverse.

So, the question becomes do we want to be a sovereign country, where the rule of law is respected, or do we want to have open borders and an amalgamation of cultural laws? Add on to it, the provision for housing, education and healthcare for anyone on our shores.

As mentioned, politics is morality in action, as it leads to the the laws, rules, and regulations of a body of people, thereby representing their interpretation of right and wrong. To learn about politics and government is to learn morality. The founding fathers felt strongly about this. So much so, in 1828 the text book, “Elementary Catechism on the Constitution of the United States” by Arthur J. Stansbury, was introduced to teach students government and morality. Having the students learn their rights and freedom was considered important in the early days of this country.

Republicans believe government exists to serve the people. Democrats believe the citizens are subservient. This, of course, represents conflicting interpretations of morality.

On November 6th, we will again determine what is right and what is wrong.

Keep the Faith!

RELATED ARTICLE: 4 Democratic Midterm Ads That Spectacularly Backfired

EDITORS NOTE: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies. This column with images is republished with permission.

EXCLUSIVE REPORT: 96.1 percent of University of Texas administrators, 93.5 percent of faculty donated to Dems

  • A Campus Reform analysis has found that an overwhelming majority of faculty and administrators at University of Texas schools contributed financially to Democrat candidates and causes from 2017-2018.
  • System employees donated a grand total of $642,693.43 during this time frame, 94.7 percent of which went to Democrat candidates and causes.

Campus Reform analyzed the 2017-2018 political donation records of employees at the University of Texas (UT), using publicly available records from the Federal Election Commission, in order to determine the political leanings of faculty and administrators at the college.

According to the Campus Reform analysis, 96.1 percent of all UT system administrators who donated to political candidates or causes gave a total of $36,852.20 to Democrat politicians or Democrat organizations, such as Texas Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke and New York congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

“In total, UT employees donated $642,693.43 from 2017-2018. Of that amount, 94.7 percent went to Democrat politicians or Democrat organizations…”    

In total, UT employees donated $642,693.43 from 2017-2018. Of that amount, 94.7 percent went to Democrat politicians or Democrat organizations, while just 5.3 percent of the donations were made to Republican politicians or Republican organizations.

In total, 917 faculty members, specifically, donated a total of $481,853.56 to politicians or political organizations. They contributed 93.5 percent of the money to Democrat politicians or organizations, such as the Texas Democrat Party and End Citizens United. Just 6.5 percent of donations went to Republican politicians or Republican causes.

Of 140 UT administrators, 137 donated $36,852.20 to Democrat political candidates and politicians. Three UT administrators gave a total of $1,500 in donations to Republican politicians or organizations from 2017-2018.

Act Blue and It Starts Today received the highest amount in donations in the Democrat and Democrat category while Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and Ted Cruz for Senate received the highest amount in donations in the Republican category.

For the purposes of this data, Campus Reform defined “faculty” as employees of the college that have direct instructional contact with students, such as professors, teachers, and instructors. “Administrators” were defined as employees who manage programming or are responsible for students and faculty, such as department chairs, deans, presidents, and provosts.

Campus Reform sorted individual donors using their self-stated position at the college. For example, if the individual donor noted that they were a “professor of literary theory,” they were designated as a faculty member. If an individual noted that they were employed as an “executive director,” they were designated as an administrator.

In the event that an employee’s title was ambiguous and could not be confirmed, they were marked as a general employee, but not sorted into faculty or administration categories. Campus Reform did not account for retired UT System employees who made political donations. Campus Reform used 180 variations of keyword searches to cull data specific to UT employees at all 14 institutions listed on the University of Texas System’s website.

Campus Reform used the most recent FEC donor records from Jan. 1, 2017 to Oct. 22, 2018.

COLUMN BY

Grace Gottschling

GRACE GOTTSCHLING

Investigative Reporter

Grace Gottschling is the Investigative Reporter for Campus Reform. She is a recent graduate of The College of New Jersey and has experience traveling across the country to engage and train others in pro-life apologetics. Grace manages research and Freedom of Information Act records requests for Campus Reform.

RELATED ARTICLES:

100 percent of Univ. of Oregon admin, 99.95 percent of faculty donate to Dems

EXCLUSIVE REPORT: 100 percent of SMU administrators, 98.8 percent of faculty donate to Dems

VIDEO: Beto O’Rourke supporters can’t name any of his accomplishments

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

NYU student senate plans Israel BDS vote … in private

  • New York University’s student senate will vote on an Israel Boycott, Divest, and Sanction resolution in private.
  • The scheduled vote comes amid rising tensions between Jewish and Palestinian groups on campus.

NYU student Senator-at-Large Rose Asaf tweeted that student senators would propose a Boycott, Divest, and Sanction resolution (BDS) against the state of Israel at the university senate meeting on Nov. 1.

“Whilst we understand that the heated nature of the discussion around the issue has led to threats of violence in the past, it does not change the fact that if the vote is held in private, it is impossible for students to know what their supposed representatives are voting for.”    

This proposal comes on the heels of a resolution, passed last semester, which urged the university to “review its nondiscrimination policies for Palestinian, Middle Eastern, and other affected students traveling to the State of Israel and attending NYU Tel Aviv,” according to NYU Local.

The final vote on the resolution is scheduled for Dec. 6 and votes will be cast anonymously, with only NYU students permitted to attend. During this time, those opposing the resolution will only be given two minutes to speak.

This resolution comes at a time when conflicts between Israel and Palestine continue to rise with student groups often clashing on campuses throughout the country.

“This resolution is explicitly posed as part of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement,” Asaf and fellow Senator-at-Large Bayan Abubakr told Washington Square News, NYU’s student-led newspaper. “A lot of the times at other universities, they’ll try to separate it from the BDS movement and say this is just divestment. We are explicitly saying that this is a result of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.”

BDS “is a Palestinian-led movement for freedom, justice, and equality” that “upholds the simple principle that Palestinians are entitled to the same rights as the rest of humanity,” according to the movement’s website.

“This resolution is not about divesting from Israel,” Asaf told Campus Reform. “It is about divesting from corporations that aid Israel in its abuse of Palestinian human rights,” although the specific contents of the resolution have yet to be released to the public.

The proposal of this resolution has alarmed students across the NYU campus, particularly within the Jewish community. Adela Cojab, who currently serves as president of NYU Realize Israel, indicated that she sees a problem with representation in student government. Cojab, a past senator, alleged that when students found out she was part of Realize Israel, she was then discriminated against on campus.

“It’s very alarming that an entire demographic [of pro-Israel students] is excluded from representation on student government, and the resolution is being presented that affects that group directly,” Cojab told Washington Square News.

“The total absence of action on states such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and China, where human rights abuses are common, shows an undue bias against Israel,” NYU College Republicans Secretary Nicholas Suri Campus Reform, saying that he does not believe the resolution itself to be anti-Semitic.

“The singling out of Israel for this action likely makes some Jewish students feel unwelcome on campus,” Suri acknowledged.

The College Republicans secretary cited the fact that NYU recently received a #9 ranking among worst schools for Jewish students.

“I do not believe a boycott/divestment would be beneficial for improving the climate in the NYU community,” he told Campus Reform. “I personally believe that this goes against NYU’s commitment to have members of all communities feel safe and welcome on campus, and will disenfranchise some students.”

“The private nature of the vote is an act of cowardice and totally prevents students from holding their senators accountable,” Suri continued. “Whilst we understand that the heated nature of the discussion around the issue has led to threats of violence in the past, it does not change the fact that if the vote is held in private, it is impossible for students to know what their supposed representatives are voting for. This makes a mockery of any supposed democracy that gives these people legitimacy.”

But Asaf defended the Student Government Association’s decision to hold a private vote.

“The vote will happen by way of the secret ballot because of McCarthyist websites like Canary Mission that try to inhibit our ability to speak freely and try to scare us into self-censorship. Student safety is my first priority,” the Student Senator-At-Large told Campus Reform

NYU did not respond to a request for comment in time for press.

COLUMN BY

Andrew Logan Lawrence

ANDREW LOGAN LAWRENCE

Campus Correspondent

Andrew Lawrence is a Georgia Campus Correspondent, and reports on liberal bias and abuse for Campus Reform. He studies Political & Social Sciences at University of Georgia, and is currently working on the Brian Kemp for Governor campaign.

RELATED ARTICLES:

More than 50 NYU groups pledge to boycott Israel

College: Prof’s refusal to write Israel letter ‘disappointing’

UMich punishes prof who denied Israel recommendation

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Armenians Brawl with Blacks and Hispanics in California High School

Armenians?

You learn something new every day.

Did you know that the center of the Armenian immigrant community in America is located in Glendale, California and that we are still bringing Armenian ‘refugees’ to the US to be placed mostly, where? in California, in and around Glendale where there are obviously ethnic and racial cultural clashes going on.

According to wikipedia, Glendale has the highest concentration of Armenians in the US.

Glendale, just a few miles away from Downtown Los Angeles, has a population of about 200,000, of which, according to some estimates, 40% is Armenian.

Thanks to reader ‘ganjagrandma’ for sending this story from the Atlanta Black Star.

It is several weeks old, but this news about racial and ethnic tensions at Glendale’s Hoover High sure didn’t make the national news.

So much for the mythical American melting pot!

Shocking Video Shows Brawl Parents Described as a ‘Race Riot’ at California High School

Several students have been disciplined after shocking footage of what concerned parents called a racially-motivated melee between dozens of teens at a Glendale, California high school.

Students involved in last Wednesday’s brawl at Hoover High School were remanded to separate rooms Monday and spoke little during “restorative circle” sessions with school counselorsaccording to KTLA.

The fight reportedly erupted during lunch period Wednesday, starting as a dispute between two students and quickly growing to involve dozens. That’s when police arrived to restore order, as the fists continued to fly.

No serious injuries were reported.

Parents said their kids tell them there’s been mounting racial tension on campus between Armenian students, the largest ethnic group at the school, and members the football and baseball teams who are mostly Black and Latino, among other ethnicities.

Ah, the joys of diversity.

More here.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images and videos is republished with permission. The featured image is courtesy of NBC News KTLA.

Washington Post Advice Columnist Gets it Right on Irrational Fear of School Shootings

These days the cynical adage “if it bleeds, it leads” seems as applicable to the news media as ever. This is all the more reason that Washington Post advice columnist Carolyn Hax should be applauded for a recent piece where she sought to quell her readers’ out-sized fears about school shootings. Titled, “Apply the empirical method to your school-shooting anxieties,” Hax urged her readers to take a moment to look at the facts about school shootings before succumbing to fear.

In the column, a parent of a kindergartner told Hax, “I am just a wreck every time I see news about a school shooting.” The Parent went on to explain “I know there are daily risks in life (getting in a car, etc.) but I am having a really hard time with the possibility that something fatal could happen to her at school,” and asked “I’d love to hear thoughts on how to deal with this anxiety.”

In the opening of her response, Hax didn’t mince words, writing, “Throw facts at your anxiety, because it is in fact irrational.” Hax explained,

Something fatal can happen to all of us anywhere — and does, eventually — but the likelihood of any U.S. child dying by any cause is very low. When something bad does happen, it is typically accidental; you brush past the “daily risks” but the numbers are much grimmer for that car trip than for any school day. School shootings are more terrifying because they’re outside our daily risk trade-offs — such as, do we stick only to places we can walk, or accept the risk inherent in vehicle travel?

The simple truth is that school shootings are extremely rare.

In another excellent piece published in the Washington Post last March, Harvard Instructor David Ropeik explained just how vanishingly rare such incidents are. Walking readers through the numbers, Ropeik noted,

The Education Department reports that roughly 50 million children attend public schools for roughly 180 days per year. Since Columbine, approximately 200 public school students have been shot to death while school was in session, including the recent slaughter at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. (and a shooting in Birmingham, Ala., on Wednesday that police called accidental that left one student dead). That means the statistical likelihood of any given public school student being killed by a gun, in school, on any given day since 1999 was roughly 1 in 614,000,000.

As one writer for the New York Times put it, “A school can expect a shooting once every few thousand years.”

Moreover, despite the prevailing news media narrative, school shootings are not becoming more common. In fact, according to research from Northeastern University Professor of Criminology, Law, and Public Policy James Alan Fox, schools are safer than they were in the 1990s.

A February piece for Northeastern.edu that summarized Fox’s work quoted the professor as follows,

Four times the number of children were killed in schools in the early 1990s than today, Fox said. “There is not an epidemic of school shootings,” he said, adding that more kids are killed each year from pool drownings or bicycle accidents.

The trouble many Americans have in accurately evaluating the prevalence and risks of violence extends beyond school shootings. Polling routinely shows that Americans believe crime is worsening, even as it has trended downwards.

Given the obvious difficulty many have in evaluating risk, and much of the news media’s alarmist bent, it is incumbent upon those who have been exposed to the facts to share their knowledge with others. Hax’s call to reason should help some to better understand the realities of school shootings, and in a small way help inject some much needed sanity into the school safety debate.

Florida Schools: Transgender Children’s Choice Must Be Hid From Parents

A Florida school superintendent in very conservative coastal Sarasota County is implementing a radically leftist transgender policy without public input or a vote of the School Board, a policy that among other things strips parents of their right to know what their child is doing in school and turns over a fundamental right of parenting to the government.

At the recommendation of the Sarasota County School District’s LGBTQI Task Force, School Superintendent Todd Bowden is issuing “guidelines” today to govern how the district’s more than 50 public schools handle transgender and gender questioning students — starting as young as kindergarten.

This surreptitious radicalization of local policy comes at the very moment that the Trump administration is considering rolling back the Obama administration’s baseless, un-scientific and lawless expansion of Title IX, the federal civil-rights statute that bans sex discrimination in federally funded education programs. Obama also did that very quietly in 2014, on his own, after Congress failed to get it changed to Obama’s satisfaction.

These are called “guidelines” presumably because an actual policy would have to go through the School Board and be subject to public hearings and public input. (The tactic is akin to when President Obama created a treaty with Iran over nuclear weapons, but called it an “agreement” to bypass the need for Senate ratification.)

Superintendent Bowden appears to be using the Obama playbook on the issue.

But while called guidelines in practice it is a policy, and it implements a full-blown transgender protocol allowing students to use whichever bathroom and locker room corresponds with the gender they “identify” as, forces everyone else to use the pronoun of the students’ choice — including “their” if they are just not sure— and checks the box of everything LGBTQI activists want.

The policy also says that parents must not be informed of their child’s decision to identify as a different gender. The student’s gender identity will be accommodated entirely in the school, which activists and some school leaders claim is a “safer” environment than the home.

If John wants to be known as Sue, his teachers and all staff must call him that. But the parents cannot be informed. John/Sue can use the girls’ bathroom, the girls’ locker room, and participate as a girl in extracurricular activities. But the parents cannot be informed. It’s all up to the child and school.

The just-released document obtained by The Revolutionary Act, entitled “Creating Safe Schools for All Students:  Gender Diverse Student Guidelines,” reads: “It is up to the student, and the student alone, to share her/his/their identity.” No parents allowed.

This policy was intended to be quietly rolled out Friday to principals overseeing 43,000 students, until one courageous School Board member was so outraged that she went public with it.

“That is completely stripping the rights of families, parents and/or guardians to be a part of this discussion,” said School Board Chairman Bridget Ziegler. “The district has no place in cutting out parents.”

If a student needs an aspirin, they need parental permission. If they want to sit out the Pledge of Allegiance, they need written permission of the parents. But if their son wants to change his gender and identify as a girl at school and use the girls’ bathrooms and locker rooms, then the parent must not even be told.

Remember, there was no vote or discussion by the elected Board, and no public or community input — in a county where Republicans outnumber Democrats 130,000 to 93,000 as of the 2016 election and that Trump won in a landslide. It was meant to be such a quiet rollout that many parents would not even be aware of it. (Part of this is due to the peculiar breakdown of the so-called “non-partisan” Board, which is 4-1 Republican, but 3-2 puppet-like supporters of the superintendent.)

Here are the core controversial parts of the new policy. Read the language. These are not guidelines, they are policy rules.

PRONOUNS: “A transgender student shall be addressed by the name and gender requested. All relevant teachers and administrators and staff shall be informed of a transgender student’s name and gender pronoun. The student’s name and gender pronoun does not need to correspond to the student’s birth certificate and other official records. It is up to the student, and the student alone, to share her/his/their identity. In the case of elementary-age students often the student and parent are involved, however, this is on a case by case basis.”

At the elementary level, the parents are involved only if the child informs them. School leaders are blocked from doing so.

BATHROOMS: “All students, who want to use the restroom in accordance with their consistently asserted gender identity, will be provided the available accommodation that best meets the needs and privacy concerns.”

Of course, this is a serious problem all on its own. But implementation will also be problematic, because in the open-ended forms of gender identity allowed in the guidelines there is “non-binary,” which “refers to anyone who does not exclusively identify as male or female. This term can include multiple gender identities, not limited to gender fluid.”

So apparently any bathroom can be used, based on the feelings of the moment?

LOCKER ROOMS: “All students, who want to use the locker room in accordance with their consistently asserted gender identity, will be provided the available accommodation that best meets the needs and privacy concerns.

FIELD TRIPS: “Day field trips and overnight field trips are opportunities for educational endeavors and social engagements and it is important to make sure that transgender students have both components. This can require some planning to ensure affirmed name, gender pronouns, room assignments, chaperones and showers are accurate and aligned with the student’s core gender identity. School administration will directly guide the process. Administration will review case by case to determine how to work with all parties involved.”

Because the School Board elections were just completed in the Florida primary, there is little that can be done to overturn this superintendent-driven policy. But expect a strong reaction from the conservative community on the loss of parental rights with their own children.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act. It is republished with permission.

Harvard Law course looks at ways to ‘push back against’ Trump strategies

  • A spring 2019 Harvard Law course description asserts that Sen. Mitch McConnell, President Donald Trump, and Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh present “challenges for democracy under law, for human rights, and for fact-based government.”
  • The course will allegedly “explore ways of using constitutional law and politics to push back against those strategies.”

A course offered by Harvard University Law School for the spring 2019 semester will focus on ways to “push back against” strategies employed by President Donald Trump and Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Harvard professor Laurence Tribe will be teaching the course, titled “Constitutional Strategies For the McConnell/Trump/Kavanaugh Era.”

“This seminar will assess the challenges for democracy under law, for human rights, and for fact-based government posed by the successful strategies of [Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch] McConnell, Trump, and Kavanaugh — and will explore ways of using constitutional law and politics to push back against those strategies,” the course description states.

The Ivy League professor has previously been outspoken with his views on the Trump administration.

“The time has come for Congress to launch an impeachment investigation of President Trump for obstruction of justice,” Tribe stated in an op-ed he wrote for the Washington Post amid the firing of former FBI Director James Comey in 2017.

Tribe also coauthored the book To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment, which, according to Amazon’s description of the book, discusses “when and whether to impeach a president.” During an interview with Time in June 2018, Tribe told the magazine that he’s never specifically called for the immediate impeachment of the current president.

“Law students who are interested — from whatever ideological perspective — in what the current political and legal landscape might mean for the litigation and/or legislation they may consider becoming involved in (whether defensively or offensively) after they graduate deserve well-informed guidance as they navigate this complex new terrain. My new seminar is designed to offer that guidance,” Tribe told Campus Reform in an email.

Harvard did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

The course offering comes amid rising political tensions at the university since the Kavanaugh hearing. Students, enraged by the prospect of Kavanaugh – a former visiting lecturer at Harvard – returning to the classroom, protested on campus.

Students held signs with messages like “boys will be held accountable” and “I still believe Anita Hill,” written across them during the Kavanaugh hearing. Students demanded an investigation of allegations against Kavanaugh for sexually assaulting multiple women and pushed for his resignation, according to the Harvard Crimson. Several students at the University filed Title IX cases against Kavanaugh to bring attention to his sexual assault accusations.

These events preceded the resignation of Kavanaugh who was slated to continue teaching law courses in January.

The U.S. Senate confirmed Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court associate justice on Oct. 6.

COLUMN BY

Sarah Gass

SARAH GASS

New Jersey Campus Correspondent

Sarah Gass is a New Jersey Campus Correspondent and reports on liberal bias and abuse for Campus Reform. She attends Drew University, where she studies Political Science and serves as the Secretary for Drew College Republicans. Additionally, she is a writer for Prager University. More By Sarah Gass.

RELATED ARTICLES:

DOJ not buying Harvard’s defense in affirmative action case

Harvard’s last sorority crumbles in face of new sanctions

This is what democracy looks like! (OPINION)

EXCLUSIVE: Gonzaga panelist tackles SUICIDE at cultural appropriation event