Michael Graham was fired from WMAL after criticizing Islam. A gutless move but not a violation of his First Amendment rights. The amendment restricts the government, not private entities, from suppressing protected speech.
A Florida teacher was recently suspended for exercising her constitutional rights. She wrote to her representative about the burden illegal aliens place on America, and the school board suspended her.
Dear Honorable Congressman,
Please consider my views when you are voting and representing voters.
I believe we must close the doors to all foreigners for awhile (sic) until we get this economy and the schools back on their feet. As a classroom teacher in Florida for 28 years, I know that foreigners are the largest users of our taxpayers’ money. Foreigners are taking all of the jobs that poor and little-educated Americans could have. Many people are being paid under the table, and therefore they are not paying their fair share of taxes. Schools are dealing with too many problems with language differences, and time is lost to our American children who have parents who pay taxes. I’m seeing money going to local charities going to Mexican, Haitian, and Mid-Eastern immigrants instead of to the poorer people of American descent. (Read the rest)
Whether you agree with her or not is hardly the point. Jan Hall is an employee of a government institution, and she was suspended for criticizing the government, the type of speech the First Amendment was created to protect.
If you’d like to write to the school board urging her reinstatement, visit this site [corrected link].
Other sources: Civil Commotion, Teacher Suspended Over ‘Puerto Ricans Destroying Orlando Letter
{ 5 trackbacks }
{ 20 comments }
Thank you, La Shawn, for making that distinction (First Amendment prohibits government, not private employers, from squashing freedom of speech). Too many on both the right and left seem a bit confused about the purpose of the Bill of Rights.
Merry
My guess is that Ms. Hall is toast. She probably went a step too far in her letter by identifying herself as fundamentally opposed to immigrants who make up 92% of the population of the school in which she teaches.
Why a letter to a congressman would end up being printed in a newspaper is curious.
She certainly has the right to speak out about the school and about immigration problems, but the school system has to protect her and to make sure that the teachers are effectively working with the students.
She will not be transferred or fired for speaking out, but for putting herself in the position that compromises her effectiveness in her teaching position.
There is room for much debate on both sides, but I suspect she will end up leaving. It is not usually a great win to force an employer to allow you to stay where you are not wanted!
I apologize for writing fired, I made a mistake & have corrected it in an update of my post on this. She was suspended, however, I cannot say I that I am confident that, had it not been for all the attention to the incident, she would not have been fired.
Of course when the case goes to trial, she will not doubt win, as this is a clear cut case, if there ever was one. However, I do hope she remains at her job.
I must agree with you, Heliotrope, in wondering how a letter to a Congressman got published in a newspaper.
I have to admit I really dislike the tone of the letter myself, but Jan has a right to speak without getting fired. Was there even a school board review? Which Rep was the recipient of the letter anyway?
Actually at a second glance of this letter, Jan really has issues. There’s no way foreigners are the biggest users of taxes in this country. Has she checked out the budget approved by Congress and passed by the idiot in chief?
La Shawn, I don’t get it when this women talks about changing the laws to keep Puerto Ricans in Puerto Rico. We acquired the island after the Spanish-American war of 1898, and since 1917, all Puerto Ricans have had U.S. citizenship, except they can’t vote in a national election.(But they don’t have to pay federal income taxes).They are no more immigrants when they go to Florida, than I am when I go to Puerto Rico!
LaShawn, slow down a bit on this one.
In theory I agree with your position. Unfortunately, sometimes public employees, because they are affiliated with the government, have restricted rights concerning advocacy.
For example there is the Hatch Act, which has been refined, but it used to restrict freedom of speech of federal government employees.
Why a letter to a congressman would end up being printed in a newspaper is curious.
Good point!
While I agree that her firing was unacceptable, I wonder if it wasn’t for the better. If she was truly that concerned with immigrants, she may find herself happer in a place like Montana rather than in a school that (as someone above mentioned) is 90+ percent immigrants.
I’d also like to point out that if the extent of one’s political rhetoric is referring to George Bush as “idiot in chief,” that’s probably a bigger insult against you than it is against him.
Not sure I have enough information to make a sound decision in this case.
Did she use her classroom as a soapbox? If that was the case, then firing her was appropriate. As a private citizen, in the public square or her home, she may say whatever she wants. However, she has no right to use government property as her own or to get children involved her personal opinions–as a government employee THAT would be a violation of the rights of others.
If this is just a case of the school being morons (which wouldn’t surprise me at all), I hope she sues and wins.
Exactly what does this woman teach? Forget the subject of the letter. Examine the calibre of its composition as it bears on the fitness of the author to be an instructor. Far from blaming the school district for firing her, I blame the school district for hiring her.
She had me until “get the troops home.” What, please, did that have to do with the issue raised in her letter? Was there a paragraph deleted that would have connected these dots? Unbelievable!
Jan Hall, the so called teacher from Florida, is an idiot. Puerto Ricans are not foreigners, they’re U.S. citizens. Citizenship was extend to Puerto Ricans in 1917, though Puerto Rico remains a territorial possession(1898 Spanish American War). And may I included that Puerto Ricans have enlisted & served the U.S. in WWII, Korea and Vietnam, to the present War on Terror.
Perhaps the reason she was suspended was because it is questionable as to whether she can adequately and effectively teach immigrant children considering her obvious disdain for them. This is NOT a first amendment issue…
“Idiot in chief”? I resent that comment.
Far better than Harry Kerry would have been.
At any rate, what’s wrong with her tone? She’s upset that people who have no right to be here are using the taxpayers money for education and welfare. I’m FAR angrier than she is about it.
These people should be immediately rounded up and deported, in my view.
Puerto Ricans (United States citizens, as jcarlos pointed out) aren’t allowed in Florida? Wow, you learn something new every day.
I understand her anger about illegal (key word there) immigrants, but I’m still disturbed by the overall tone of her letter.
And on a purely snarky note: she would have done well to have someone proofread her letter prior to sending it out. Oi!
How come ABC is not in front of Congress explaining why it supports a group that funds Hamas?
i’m a teacher and have been very involved with my association at a local level. i have some real problems with the nea, but this is a prime example of why teachers formed the ‘union’ and a large reason why they usually belong to the organization when they otherwise would not. (many teachers would prefer to join the local and/or state associations only but that isn’t an option. another example: my region director had been a classroom teacher who was sued by some parents for putting a band aid on their kid’s finger!) i know we have to find a balance, but administrators aren’t known for standing up for their staff when it’s the right thing to do.
she could very well have gotten the bad treatment from the administrators who spend a good part of their days in the statehouse lobbying and who have written a few letters themselves!! sheesh! she’s not only a teacher, but she’s a private citizen and her writing that letter is her right and nobody else’s business!!!!
She made some good points, but she did sensationalize some (I doubt illegal immigrants use more taxpayer money than any other group). But for the government to discipline an employee for speaking dissenting views is unconstitutional as well as reprehensible.
The real mystery is, where are the screams from mainstream media types who would be full of rage if this was how an anti-war protester was treated?
Oh, yeah, I forgot…… all liberal speech is progressive, and all conservative speech is hate speech.
This sure seems like a bad decision on the part of the school system, but it’s an employment law issue, not a First Amendment one. Nobody’s preventing this woman from saying whatever she wants – they’re just declining to employ her.
Comments on this entry are closed.