Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Ohio Department of Education’s adoption of Critical Race Theory and the 1619 Project’s for implementation throughout Ohio’s school systems, we should all agree that an open and robust debate about that policy before public bodies is appropriate and required under the U.S. Constitution. But that’s not how the Ohio Board of Education sees things.
Once they hastily adopted the new policies, they then formally forbade speakers before them from criticizing their decision. The ODE allows public comment on all other topics, but specifically not these two.
So, last week, the Finney Law Firm filed suit against ODE challenging these restrictions on speech during the public comment section of Board meetings. Read that suit here.
The Board did not just quietly and unconstitutionally squelch in a public forum, but they explained why they were privileged — indeed compelled — to trample on the Constitution in this instance:
- “[O]ur board president has instituted a policy that prevents people from speaking to our group in reference to any of these issues about critical race theory, etc.… I’m not sure why we have a filter on what we’re allowed to hear here, but we do.”
- “I was really glad when [LAURA KOHLER] said we weren’t going to have those speeches anymore”
- “I would just prefer that we not have a conversation about critical race theory, or 1619….”
- “I don’t want to sit here again and listen to two months of people – they have their opinions…. This is not what I’m here for”
- “I’m using race and I don’t feel ashamed about that”
- That if such public comments or testimony were allowed then the meeting of the OHIO STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION “would not longer be a safe space for me”
I suppose if you are that delicate and thin-skinned, perhaps you should not sign up for the rough and tumble of public office. Just a thought.
Media coverage of this is below:
- Enquirer: Ohio Board of Education accused of limiting comments about race curriculum
- Daily Wire: Ohio State Board of Education Sued for Allegedly Banning Criticism of ‘1619 Project’