bigots – Techdirt (original) (raw)

Iowa’s New Book Ban/Anti-LGBTQ Law Mostly Dead Following Federal Court Injunction

from the if-you-want-to-be-evil,-you'll-have-to-do-it-more-constitutionally dept

If you love to irrationally hate, you’ll hate this. The Iowa legislature recently shat out a bill that allowed the state to start punishing people for not being straight and/or white. It was signed into law by another hateful person, Governor Kim Reynolds — the head of (this) state that recently made it clear she’s willing to starve her state’s children to own the libs. I am not even kidding.

Iowa will not participate this summer in a federal program that gives $40 per month to each child in a low-income family to help with food costs while school is out, state officials have announced.

The state has notified the U.S. Department of Agriculture that it will not participate in the 2024 Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children — or Summer EBT — program, the state’s Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Education said in a Friday news release.

“Federal COVID-era cash benefit programs are not sustainable and don’t provide long-term solutions for the issues impacting children and families. An EBT card does nothing to promote nutrition at a time when childhood obesity has become an epidemic,” Iowa Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds said in the news release.

Yeah… that’s how Iowa’s being run right now — by someone who thinks giving people $40/month for food will somehow contribute to childhood obesity. If that doesn’t make you vomit in your mouth a little and/or feel a bit stabby, I don’t know what to tell you.

Anyway, the law went into effect and immediately became the subject of two lawsuits. The first lawsuit was filed by concerned parents, students, and the GLBT Youth in Iowa Task Force. Easy enough to ignore, I suppose. The second lawsuit, however, featured a very heavy hitter in the list of plaintiffs: publishing heavyweight Penguin Random House. And that wasn’t the only powerful player in this litigation market. The other major plaintiff was the Iowa State Education Association, the union representing the state’s educators.

Codifying hate is always an option. But it’s rarely a constitutional option. And such is the case here, with this law neatly summarized by Courthouse News Service in its coverage of the ensuing lawsuits.

Among other things, the new law requires public school districts to ban books and materials containing descriptions or depictions of “sex acts” from all Iowa school libraries except for certain religious texts, such as the Bible, and forbids mention of sexual orientation or gender identity from kindergarten through the sixth grade, in or outside of the classroom. And, the law requires teachers, counselors, and other school staff to report to parents if a student asks to be referred to by names or pronouns that align with their gender identity.

When a law is already this shitty, any summary that begins with “among other things” makes it clear the “other things” aren’t any better than what’s contained in the summary. Here’s what the lawsuit filed by Penguin Random House had to say about just the book ban:

First, under the pretext of protecting students from “pornography,” Senate File 496 prohibits books in school libraries and classroom collections that contain a description or visual depiction of a “sex act.” This restriction applies to all grades, kindergarten through twelfth grade, without consideration of the book as a whole, only excepting religious books. By so broadly regulating the display and availability of books that are constitutionally protected as to at least a significant number of students, this standard violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it is an impermissible content-based restriction, restricts access to constitutionally protected books, and is unconstitutionally vague.

Second, a portion of Senate File 496 also appears, and is being interpreted by Iowa school districts, to prohibit books in school libraries and classroom collections that “relate” to “gender identity” or “sexual orientation.” This sweeping prohibition defines gender identity and sexual orientation so broadly that the prohibition could apply to all gender identities and any depiction of a romantic relationship. This prohibition violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it is an impermissible content-based restriction and is unconstitutionally vague. In practice this prohibition appears to have been intended to apply, and has been applied, to remove only books containing LGBTQ+ themes or characters or those written by authors within the LGBTQ+ community. Therefore, this prohibition also violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it discriminates against LGBTQ+ viewpoints and authors.

As I stated then, this law would never survive a constitutional challenge. The only thing left unanswered was how long it would take before a court blocked its enforcement.

We now have that answer: not long. Roughly a month after the lawsuits’ arrival in court, a decision has been handed down that blocks the law from being enforced (for the most part). (h/t NBC News for the update, but I’ll be deducting points because the broadcasting giant couldn’t be bothered to post a copy of the decision.)

The injunction order [PDF] consolidates both lawsuits to give both sets of plaintiffs the same answer: the law is not only bad, it’s unconstitutional.

The state loses badly here. Pretty much every aspect of the law violates the Constitution. The book ban fares the worst, with the court noting it has never before encountered such a broad attack on First Amendment rights. (All emphasis mine.)

As to the book restrictions, the Court GRANTS the Motions for Preliminary Injunction and ENJOINS the enforcement of Senate File 496. The law is incredibly broad and has resulted in the removal of hundreds of books from school libraries, including, among others, nonfiction history books, classic works of fiction, Pulitzer Prize winning contemporary novels, books that regularly appear on Advanced Placement exams, and even books designed to help students avoid being victimized by sexual assault. The sweeping restrictions in Senate File 496 are unlikely to satisfy the First Amendment under any standard of scrutiny and thus may not be enforced while the case is pending. Indeed, the Court has been unable to locate a single case upholding the constitutionality of a school library restriction even remotely similar to Senate File 496.

TL;DR: Do NOT be coming here with this bullshit. The book ban is benchslapped so hard, state legislators’ kids will be wearing Judge Stephen Locher’s handprints for weeks to come. (h/t Popehat, whom I’m pretty sure I stole that imagery from.)

That takes care of the book ban, which will never be allowed to be enforced ever… at least not in this nation.

As for the rest of the law? Well, that doesn’t go much better for the state, Governor, and the hideous lawmakers who thought this could actually be a law. It starts out sounding like a win for these hateful people who don’t deserve to be paid by the public…

First, nothing in the law restricts the ability of school districts, teachers, or other professionals to provide programs, promotion, and/or instruction of gender identity and sexual orientation to students in grade seven and above. School districts instead have full freedom to offer gay straight alliances (“GSAs”) or similar clubs that provide resources and support for LGBTQ+ students in grades seven and above. Teachers and other licensed professionals are not restricted in any way from serving as advisors for such GSAs, displaying rainbow flags, providing instruction on gay and transgender rights, and otherwise performing their responsibilities in a manner that emphasizes inclusiveness and respect for LGBTQ+ students in grades seven and above.

At first blush, it sounds like a possible win for the legislators who crafted a law meant to diminish the rights of certain people but inadvertently managed to actually uphold their rights, so long as those people had passed the sixth grade. But as anyone familiar with context can tell you, the “first” at the beginning of the paragraph means there’s going to be a “second.” And it’s the back half where the law goes wrong yet again.

Second, but conversely, there is also a misunderstanding of Senate File 496 as it relates to students in grade six and below. The law forbids programs, promotion, and instruction to students in those grades relating to “gender identity” and “sexual orientation,” but those terms are defined a neutral way that makes no distinction between cisgender or transgender identity or gay or straight relationships. Meaning: on its face, the law forbids any programs, promotion, or instruction recognizing that anyone is male or female or in a relationship of any sort (gay or straight). The statute is therefore content-neutral but so wildly overbroad that every school district and elementary school teacher in the State has likely been violating it since the day the school year started. This renders the statute void for vagueness under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the State will have unfettered discretion to decide when to enforce it and against whom, thus making it all but impossible for a reasonable person to know what will and will not lead to punishment.

Yeah, you read that right. The bigoted legislators who want everyone to be subjected to a hetero-centric worldview inadvertently criminalized discussing heterosexuality. If it were up to me, I’d let this part of the law stay alive and force those fuckers to live with it. Any attempt to amend it would just end up being blocked by the courts, so there would really be no downside. Educators prone to fighting the “woke virus” or whatever would be subject to punishment the legislature clearly meant to target those more willing to treat students like human beings and not pass judgment on those that are different from them.

The injunction doesn’t block the entire law, but only because the current plaintiffs in these suits can’t demonstrate they’ll be harmed by it.

[N]o Plaintiff has standing to challenge the provisions of Senate File 496 requiring school districts to notify a child’s parents if the child asks for the use of pronouns that do not match the school’s registration records or otherwise seeks an accommodation relating to gender identity. Only the GLBT Youth Student Plaintiffs challenge this portion of the law, but they are all already “out” to their families and therefore not affected in a concrete way by this requirement. Thus, the Court has no authority to do anything except DENY the GLBT Youth Student Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction as it relates to this aspect of Senate File 496.

That’s not the court saying this part of the law is good and correct and constitutional. That’s the court stating what’s needed to successfully challenge this particular aspect of this particularly awful law.

We’re seeing a lot of hate in this nation. That’s nothing new. Fortunately, the Constitution is still capable of shutting down the worst tendencies of the worst people writing laws. The nation’s courts may not always protect everyone (see also: Dobbs) but the lower levels are still doing their best (in most cases!) to prevent the government from devolving into the sort of hate-based governing that punishes people simply because of their sexual orientation or preferences. We’re still the land of the free. Unfortunately, we’re also the home of the brave cowards, people who can’t accept anything that doesn’t mirror their own extremely limited perceptions.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, bigots, book ban, censorship, injunction, iowa, kim reynolds, lgbtq, libraries, school library, schools, senate file 496, stephen locher
Companies: penguin random house

Cops Are Being Trained By Consultants Who Have Publicly Outed Themselves As Bigots And Far Right Extremists

from the sort-of-C.V.-cops-tend-to-respect dept

In news that is altogether so unsurprising it needs a “resigned sob” emoji attached, a Reuters investigation has found that far-right extremists are training cops because of course they are.

Given law enforcement’s beginnings as an entity tasked with ensuring plantation owners maintained their access to free labor, it’s little wonder that cop shops have welcomed racists and fans of authoritarianism into their ranks. This continues even as times (and laws) have changed. America has made halting, often unconvincing moves towards equality. Meanwhile, law enforcement has continued to court people who believe might — and far more often, white — makes right. A majority of law enforcement officers are white males. And that’s why they welcome training from white males who believe white males are still the best people this country has to offer.

On social media, Richard Whitehead is a warrior for the American right. He has praised extremist groups. He has called for public executions of government officials he sees as disloyal to former President Donald Trump. In a post in 2020, he urged law enforcement officers to disobey COVID-19 public-health orders from “tyrannical governors,” adding: “We are on the brink of civil war.”

Rather than regarded warily as some sort of unpredictable animal, Whitehead has been not only welcomed, but also paid handsomely to deliver extremist-soaked “training” to a nation of government employees.

The Idaho-based law enforcement consultant has taught at least 560 police officers and other public safety workers in 85 sessions in 12 states over the past four years, according to a Reuters analysis of public records from the departments that hired him.

Whitehead’s willingness to swim in the mud with fellow bigots has occasionally hurt him. But it hasn’t hurt him often enough or deeply enough. As the Reuters investigation notes, Whitehead was temporarily banned from advertising his training wares by the Washington state training commission, which expressed concerns with training materials Whitehead offered that referred to a turban-wearing officer as a “towel head” and (for who knows what fucking reason) “contained cartoons of women in bikinis.”

Whitehead — being white, ignorant, and an asshole — learned nothing from this experience.

Since then, he said, he has expanded the section of his course that caused that controversy, adding more “pot-stirring” material, including a slide that ridicules transgender people: “Suspect is a gender-fluid assigned-male-at-birth wearing non-gender-specific clothing born Caucasian but identifies as a mountain panda.” Whitehead said such barbs are intended to push back against pressures on law enforcement to espouse left-wing views on gender or race.

That’s a shitty thing to do to people. These are not “left-wing views.” This is simply treating other human beings as human beings. This is nothing more than asking officers to attempt to understand cultures unfamiliar to them or gender identities that may not seem apparent. Respecting these does not reflect poorly on an officer. But they’re trained by asshats like Whitehead to believe it does: that treating anyone who isn’t a cop like a human being is a form of weakness. The “warrior mentality” is a way of life for cops, something drilled into their skulls by those training them and amplified by the federal government’s willingness to give them free access to military surplus gear. Us vs. them, with “us” being cops and everyone else, no matter their race, color, or sexual identity, being the enemy.

Also unsurprising: Whitehead isn’t alone in his far right views and his willingness to let his bigotry color (sorry) his training.

He’s one of five police trainers identified by Reuters whose political commentary on social media has echoed extremist opinions or who have public ties to far-right figures.

[…]

One trainer attended Trump’s January 6, 2021, rally at the U.S. Capitol that devolved into a riot, injuring more than 100 police officers. Two of the trainers have falsely asserted that prominent Democrats including President Joe Biden are pedophiles, a core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy theory. Four have endorsed or posted records of their past interactions with far-right extremist figures, including prominent “constitutional sheriff” leader David Clarke Jr. and Proud Boys leader Joe Biggs, who is being prosecuted for his involvement in the Capitol riots.

Cops who claim to respect the rule of law should be steering far clear of extremists like these. Instead, they and their views are embraced. This is evidenced by the astounding number of cops (current and former) and law enforcement officials who participated in the raid of the Capitol on January 6, 2020 in an attempt to overturn a lawful election.

These are fringe figures. There is no debate. Whitehead and the others singled out by this investigation hold views that are not all that far removed from fringe-fondling sovereign citizens. As Whitehead has clearly (but moronically) stated, he believes elected sheriffs should be free to ignore any law they personally feel is unconstitutional. This obviously includes things like vaccine mandates and “sanctuary city” laws. But Whitehead’s belief in the “constitutional sheriff” goes beyond these confines. In his belief, not even the US president can order elected local sheriffs to do anything.

Whitehead is not alone in his extremism or his ability to bend the ears of cops who are likely receptive to his hot takes on race, and also to his belief that police officers should have to answer to no one.

Kansas-based trainer Darrel Schenck teaches firearms classes through his own company as well as through the law enforcement division of the National Rifle Association (NRA), the leading U.S. gun-rights lobby. Schenck has voiced the belief that Democrats are pedophiles, called reports of violence during the U.S. Capitol riots “fake news,” and declared the 2020 election illegitimate, commenting: “election fraud is the real pandemic.”

[…]

Police instructor Adam Davis characterized Biden as a “puppet and a pedophile” on Facebook. In other posts, he slammed people who protest racial bias in policing as “pawns” in the “scheme to destroy this nation.”

Davis has worked as a contractor for Street Cop Training, one of the biggest private providers of law enforcement instruction. He spoke at an industry trade conference hosted by the company in October, and he gives lectures to police agencies nationwide. Street Cop Training did not respond to requests for comment.

A lot of entities refused to comment. But these trainers did. And they universally claimed their extremist-aligned social media posts were nothing more than raising innocent questions about government narratives or just poor attempts at humor. They also claimed they were able to separate their personal beliefs and politics from the training they provide to officers.

But law enforcement loves these views. And most officers have no problem with people who associate with Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, bigots, and conspiracy theorists. Those paying for their training overlook concerning background info, like trainers espousing batshit election conspiracy theories or suggesting a lawful election is the government being overthrown.

If this is what cops want, let them shout it from the rooftops. Don’t let them hide behind noncommittal statements about “concerns” or “investigations” that never seem to conclude. Let the would-be authoritarians embrace their worst aspects. But make it public. Don’t let them pretend this isn’t what they want.

If cops want to be coddled by white extremists and bigots who encourage their “us vs. them” beliefs, they can own it. And, in doing so, they will make it clear to the general public who they serve: themselves. Those who haven’t been paying attention can decide whether their Gadsden flag encompasses the jackboots they otherwise worship. And those who have been paying attention can stop trying to meet cops halfway and let them know they’re not deserving of our respect or our tax dollars.

Filed Under: bigots, extremists, police, training