Edu 210 Portfolio Artifact 2

1 PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

Portfolio Assignment #2: Freedom of Expression Margaret E. Lewis College of Southern Nevada

2 PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to examine a variety of court cases and determine how the courts should rule in the case of a tenured teacher, Ann Griffin, against the recommendation of her dismissal by the principal, Freddie Watts. The first two paragraphs will evaluate two different court cases that support Griffin’s dismissal, and the next two paragraphs will evaluate two different court cases that support her remaining at the school. After evaluating, a conclusion will be made on whether or not Griffin should be dismissed.

3 PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression

Portfolio Assignment #2: Freedom of Expression Introduction In a discussion with the principal and vice principal of her school, Ann Griffin, a white teacher with tenure, made a bigoted remark towards people of color. As Griffin was teaching at a high school mainly comprised of people of color, including both the administrators with whom Griffin was conversing, principal Freddie Watts was rightly concerned. Based on her remark, Watts concluded that Griffin’s bias against the black students may negatively impact her ability to teach each student effectively, and recommended her dismissal. The following paragraphs will examine court cases that do and do not support Griffin’s dismissal and determine whether her speech was protected or unprotected. Supporting Griffin’s Dismissal The first case to be brought forward in support of Griffin’s dismissal is that of Melzer v. Board of Education, found in the textbook. Melzer was discovered to be an active member of the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). Like Griffin, he was a tenured teacher, and taught for over 30 years, participating heavily in various school activities. Although he was never convicted of any crimes related to pedophilia or otherwise, the courts supported his termination. As stated by the courts, “Melzer was terminated solely because his employer reasonably believed that the public exposure of [Melzer's] associational activities was likely to impair Melzer's effectiveness as a teacher and cause internal disruption if he were returned to the classroom.” This case is similar to Griffin’s in that Griffin’s remarks, although

4 PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression technically protected by freedom of speech, were offensive to many members of her school and would certainly impact her effectiveness as a teacher. Munroe v. Central Bucks School District is the next case to be presented in favor of Griffin’s dismissal. Natalie Munroe, an English teacher in the Central Bucks School District, maintained a personal blog which she occasionally used as a place to vent about her students. She made several derogatory and offensive comments about her students, similar to how Griffin exclaimed her hatred of “all black folks” in a discussion with two administrators. After her blog was discovered, students and their parents were understandably concerned about her ability to be an effective teacher when she so clearly hated many of her own students. She was ultimately fired in 2012. Munroe claimed this termination violated her First Amendment rights, and took the School District to court. The courts ruled against her, asserting that Munroe’s words were “sufficiently disruptive so as to diminish any legitimate interest in its expression, and thus her expression was not protected.” Griffin’s remark was comparably disruptive, which leads to the conclusion that her termination would also be upheld by the courts. Against Griffin’s Dismissal The first case to be presented against Griffin’s dismissal is that of Doe v. Los Angelos Unified School District. Like the case in question, this case focuses on the alleged racial discrimination of a teacher against students of another race. This case was brought forward by student Jane Doe against her teacher Steven Carnine. Doe was an African American student, and claimed Carnine treated her more rudely than other students from the first day of class. She also claims that during a discussion regarding stereotypes, Carnine implied that he thought black people were stupid, and in another discussion regarding the Civil War, he directed a

5 PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression derogatory term for black people towards her. The teacher was suspended; he appealed the suspension, and was able to return to his classroom. The LAUSD took no further disciplinary action against Carnine. This supports the argument that Griffin would not be dismissed. The final court case to be presented is Hecht v. National Heritage Academies, Inc. This case presents evidence for the argument against Griffin’s dismissal. In this case, former teacher Craig Hecht was suing his former employers due to wrongful termination and racial discrimination. While working at the school, Hecht had made comments about brown and white tables that made other workers uncomfortable. It was a predominantly black school, and Hecht was white. Hecht has made comments such as “white tables are better,” and “burn the brown tables.” These words were construed as having racial connotations, and Hecht was fired. After a great deal of investigation, the courts found that Hecht’s comments, though distasteful, were not sufficient reason to fire him, and he was awarded back pay. Considering the similarities in this case and Griffin’s, this could support the case against Griffin’s dismissal. Conclusion After analyzing these four court cases, I have come to the conclusion that Griffin should be dismissed. As evidenced in the cases Melzer v. Board of Education and Munroe v. Central Bucks School District, a teacher’s freedom of expression can only go so far. Teachers must be respectful of their fellow employees as well as their students, and should not engage in any kind of activity that corrupts their role as a teacher. Under Melzer v. Board of Education, the actions of Melzer were offensive to the community and prevented him from being able to teach effectively. I find that Griffin’s words were similarly offensive, and if made public by the principal, would be equally disruptive. Under Munroe v. Central Bucks School District,

6 PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENT #2: Freedom of Expression Munroe’s words were also found disruptive by the courts, which once again adequately corresponds to Griffin’s case. Schools have every right to terminate a teacher that disrespects their students and disrespects their position as an educator.

References Munroe v. Central Bucks School District (Third Circuit June 8, 2015) (Http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/143509p.pdf, Dist. file). Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). ​School law for teachers: Concepts and applications.​ Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. Doe v. Los Angeles Unified School District (United States District Court, C.D. California April 24, 2017) (Http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20170424_0003192.CCA.htm/qx , Dist. file). Hecht v. National Heritage Academies, Inc. (July 26, 2016) (Http://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-supreme-court/1744001.html, Dist. file).