EXCLUSIVE: Here’s How Parents Can Protect Their Rights As Kids Head Back To School
'Advocate for their children and make informed decisions'
Last year, I took a stand against the Pulaski County School District in Kentucky when the district tried to silence me for speaking out against its unlawful political advocacy. Today, I’m proud to announce a resounding victory for free speech.
The district has agreed to a consent decree admitting it blocked me from its social media page and censored my voice. The district has also been ordered to pay $30,000 in attorneys’ fees to cover the costs of my legal battle and must train staff on First Amendment principles to prevent future violations.
When government entities like school districts use social media platforms to push their agendas while silencing critics, they erode the foundation of free expression.
This win, secured with the help of the Liberty Justice Center, sends a clear message: Government entities, including public school districts, cannot suppress dissent without consequences.
The trouble began on August 11, 2024, when Pulaski County Schools used its official social media pages and website to lobby against Amendment 2, a ballot measure to advance school choice in Kentucky. As an advocate for educational freedom, I criticized the district for using taxpayer-funded platforms to engage in political advocacy — something clearly prohibited under Kentucky law.
In response, the district froze comments on its posts and temporarily blocked me from its social media page. It was a blatant attempt to silence criticism and stifle debate — a textbook violation of the First Amendment.
Sadly, Amendment 2 was defeated at the ballot box in November, denying Kentucky families greater educational options — at least for now. School districts like Pulaski County, by breaking state law to campaign against the measure and silence critics like me, put their thumbs on the scale to sway the outcome. Their actions may have undermined the democratic process in 2024, but this legal victory ensures they won’t get away with such tactics in the future.
I wasn’t about to let their censorship slide. With support from the Liberty Justice Center, we sent demand letters to the district on August 14 and August 26, 2024. The pressure worked. The district removed the offending posts and unblocked me. But it stopped short of promising not to censor others in the future.
That’s when we decided to take the district to court. On January 15, we filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, alleging that Pulaski County Schools violated my First Amendment rights by punishing me for my views.
RELATED: Canada declares independence from Liberal censorship — with Donald Trump’s help
Eightshot Studio via iStock/Getty Images
This case was never just about me. It was about every American silenced by a government official for speaking the truth.
Public school districts don’t belong to superintendents or school boards. They’re funded by taxpayers and accountable to the public. When officials censor dissent or block critics, they violate the core principles that make self-government possible.
The First Amendment protects free and open debate. It doesn’t exist to shield bureaucrats from scrutiny.
Our legal strategy centered on a 2024 Supreme Court ruling — Lindke v. Freed — which made clear that public officials using social media in their official capacity cannot block users based on viewpoint without violating the Constitution.
That ruling changed everything. It gave us the legal leverage to hold Pulaski County accountable.
While this victory may be personal, its implications are far-reaching. Social media has become a public square, where ideas are debated and policies are scrutinized. When government entities like school districts use these platforms to push their agendas while silencing critics, they erode the foundation of free expression.
My case sets a precedent that other districts across the country should heed: You cannot hide behind a “block” button to avoid accountability. The First Amendment applies online just as it does offline.
I’ve spent years fighting for educational freedom, advocating policies that empower parents and students. The defeat of Amendment 2 was a setback, but the fight for school choice continues. None of this work is possible without the freedom to speak out. Pulaski County Schools thought it could shut me up. Instead, the district amplified the message that censorship won’t be tolerated.
The $30,000 in attorneys’ fees is a signal that those who violate free speech will pay a price. The mandatory First Amendment training ensures the district’s staff will think twice before trying to silence anyone else. And the consent decree puts them under a judge’s watchful eye, ensuring compliance.
This win wouldn’t have been possible without the Liberty Justice Center, whose legal team fought tirelessly to defend my rights and the rights of every American to speak freely. The center's work, grounded in the Supreme Court’s recent ruling, shows that the law is catching up to the realities of the digital age. Government officials can no longer hide behind vague policies or technicalities to suppress dissent.
The Constitution is clear, and so is the message from this case: Free speech is non-negotiable.
To my fellow advocates, parents, and citizens: Don’t be afraid to speak out. When you see a school district or any government entity overstepping its bounds, call it out. The First Amendment is your shield, and cases like mine show that it still has teeth. Pulaski County Schools learned that lesson the hard way. Let’s make sure others don’t have to.
A member of the school board of directors in Allentown, Pennsylvania, has been criminally charged after she apparently fabricated a race hoax by allegedly fashioning a noose and planting it on her desk.
Around 7:40 a.m. on January 10, the Allentown Police Department received a call from LaTarsha Brown, a 42-year-old city employee and school board member. Brown reported that a half-hour earlier, she had arrived at her desk on the third floor at City Hall and discovered "what she believed to be a noose" lying there, a statement from the APD said.
'Acts like this have long plagued our communities and serve as a painful reminder of the work still ahead.'
Brown reportedly acknowledged to police that she picked up the item and took a picture of it but did not do "much more than that." She also quickly fired off a lengthy email to her work colleagues, ostensibly about the alleged incident.
Within days, community activists gathered outside City Hall to demonstrate against the supposed "hate crime." "Enough is enough," wailed Union Baptist Church Pastor Benjamin Hailey, who referred to the alleged noose as "a symbol of hatred."
"Acts like this have long plagued our communities and serve as a painful reminder of the work still ahead," added state Rep. Napoleon Nelson (D-Montgomery), chairman of the Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus. "I am deeply dismayed but unfortunately not surprised."
By that time, law enforcement was already busy conducting an investigation into the alleged noose. Officers identified all the city employees who accessed the third floor of City Hall between the time Brown left work on the afternoon of January 9 until she returned to work the following day.
Cops also asked each of the employees whether they were willing to provide a sample of their DNA. "Every city employee agreed, except Ms. Brown," the APD statement said, though she eventually reversed course after the Lehigh County D.A.'s office secured a search warrant.
— (@)
At some point, Brown apparently seemed to lose interest in getting to the bottom of alleged noose. Though she was "initially cooperative," police said, Brown "later requested that the investigation be discontinued."
Her request was apparently denied, because the alleged noose and the DNA samples were sent over to the Pennsylvania State Police crime lab for testing.
On March 10, the PSP Forensic DNA Division issued a report claiming that "Ms. Brown's DNA matched the DNA profile obtained from the swabs of both the outer surface and the inner knotted portion of the noose after taken apart," APD claimed. APD reiterated that "no other person's DNA profiles" were found on the evidence collected in connection with the case.
On Monday, APD announced that Brown had been charged with tampering with or fabricating physical evidence and filing a false report, both misdemeanors. Together, the charges carry a maximum sentence of three years in jail and a $7,500 fine.
'LaTarsha Brown is innocent. LaTarsha Brown deserves justice.'
Not only do police have forensic evidence that indicates Brown concocted a race hoax, but other circumstantial evidence may point to a possible motive.
By the time the alleged noose appeared on her desk, Brown had already filed discrimination complaints against a coworker and had even emailed her superiors on January 9 — the day before she found the apparent noose — to inquire about resolving those complaints via mediation, according to Lehigh Valley News, which cited court documents.
After finding the alleged noose, she emailed her bosses again, claiming to have reached her "breaking point."
Brown did not respond to a request for comment from Lehigh Valley News.
When reports of the alleged noose first broke, Allentown Mayor Matt Tuerk expressed concern, calling it "horrible and unacceptable." However, he now seems less convinced of its legitimacy.
"It’s doubly shocking that an employee would — that she would have fabricated this incident," Tuerk said after Brown was charged.
Still, Brown has some supporters who remain convinced that she is the innocent victim of a vicious hate crime. Activist Josie Lopez, who orchestrated the noose protest back in January, claimed that the charges are a "smear campaign" against Brown in "retaliation" for daring "to stand up against injustice."
"LaTarsha Brown is innocent. LaTarsha Brown deserves justice," Lopez urged.
"I am calling on the people of Allentown, the media, and everyone who believes in justice to stand with LaTarsha. We will not be silent."
Brown is an elected member of the Allentown School Board of Directors, and her term expires this year. However, according to the Lehigh Valley News, she has yet to file paperwork to run for re-election, and the deadline for submission expired last week.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Voters in Dearborn, Mich., a Muslim-American stronghold outside Detroit, have elected a former Bernie Sanders surrogate who defends the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah to serve on the city’s school board.
The post Pro-Hamas Bernie Bro Elected to Dearborn School Board appeared first on .
A West Virginia school board "punished" a group of middle school girls who protested a biological male competing against them at a track meet earlier this month, according to a legal complaint.
Cellphone video showed girls from Lincoln Middle School staging a protest in the shot put ring at the Harrison County Middle School Championships on April 18; one by one, they stepped into the ring and then quickly stepped out without making attempts.
— (@)
While the video in the post from female athlete advocate Riley Gaines appears to show six separate protests by Lincoln girls in the shot put ring, AthleticNet indicated that five Lincoln girls posted "ND" (no distance) in the finals. Gaines also wrote that five girls refused to participate.
Blaze News reported that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals just days prior to the meet ruled in a 2-1 decision that a West Virginia law requiring every student athlete to participate in accordance with their biological sex violates the Title IX rights of Becky Pepper-Jackson — the student against whom the girls protested.
Pepper-Jackson — a biological male — has been living as a female and taking puberty blockers for years. AthleticNet said Pepper-Jackson of Bridgeport won the shot put final at the meet with a toss of 32 feet, 9 inches, easily besting the second-place finisher by more than three feet.
Parents of four of the five protesting girls filed the legal complaint against the Harrison County Board of Education.
The complaint states the girls attended an April 24 press conference addressing their protest. Attendees included Gaines and state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and Auditor J.B. McCuskey, along with several Republicans from the state Senate and House of Delegates, the complaint states.
The complaint also states that the next day — Thursday — the father of one of the girls "spoke with Lincoln Middle School principal Lori Scott," who told him that the girls who protested "would not be permitted to compete in a scheduled track and field meet on April 27, 2024."
The complaint also states that a father of another girl spoke with coach Dawn Riestenberg, who "informed him that his daughter would not be allowed to participate in the scheduled track and field meet on April 27." The complaint adds that Riestenberg told the dad that the girls were barred from the meet because it was her job “to score points for the track team,” which the complaint says correlates to "the minor student athletes’ protest and subsequent appearance at a press conference to the decision to ban them from competition."
The complaint states that the protesting girls "are being punished" by the school board "for exercising their rights to freedom of speech and expression under the Constitution of West Virginia."
The complaint was filed Friday — the day before the April 27 meet from which the girls allegedly were barred — and seeks no monetary damages, only "injunctive relief." State Attorney General Morrisey filed an amicus brief Friday in support of the parents' complaint.
“The only thing this decision does is teach these children to keep their mouths shut and not disagree with what they saw as unfairness,” Morrisey said in a news release, according to WBOY-TV. “That is outrageous and it tramples these students’ rights to freedom of speech and expression.”
Apparently, the complaint and even support from the state attorney general were not enough.
AthleticNet records show that none of the Lincoln Middle School girls listed in the complaint took part in the shot put competition at the Mid Mountain 10 Championships on April 27.
In addition, while it's been reported that the protesting girls were barred from competition for a longer period of time, all the girls in the complaint are listed on the shot put stat sheet from a Monday invitational meet.
The school board on Tuesday didn't immediately reply to Blaze News' request for comment on the complaint.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!