First Amendment Update
8 CommentsSEVEN AND A HALF YEARS
Once again, the federal district court (Judge Jesús G. Bernal) has denied our request for injunctive relief in our lawsuit against Claremont Unified School District.
Many of you know our story. From 2000 to 2018, Claremont students visited our farm and took part in our living-history programs on the American Revolution, the California Gold Rush, and the Civil War. Then—after a single parent complained about posts on my personal Twitter account criticizing Louis Farrakhan’s antisemitic rhetoric and commenting on the activism of David Hogg—Claremont ended a relationship that had served students for nearly two decades. To this day, after seven years of litigation, Claremont still has not produced evidence of additional parent complaints.
This case matters because it goes to a basic question: can a public school district retaliate against a private citizen and a small educational organization because it dislikes the speaker’s viewpoint—especially when that speaker’s comments were made on a personal account, outside any school program?
The Ninth Circuit has already reversed Judge Bernal twice in our favor. We believe the current ruling is legally unsound and that a third appeal is necessary. The broader trend is unmistakable: pressure is growing—here and abroad—to narrow the space for lawful speech and punish disfavored viewpoints. If government entities can effectively blacklist speakers through “informal” means, the First Amendment becomes a promise on paper rather than a protection in practice.
Here is the immediate problem: appeals and defense against collateral pressure are expensive. Today we received a demand letter seeking more than $100,000. Our customers have helped cover a portion of these legal costs, but we cannot meet this next phase without strong donor support.
If you believe the First Amendment must protect ordinary Americans—not just the powerful—please consider making a donation today to help us fund the next appeal and continue this fight. Your gift directly supports the legal work required to keep this case moving and to hold government actors accountable.
Thank you for standing with us when it counts.
Tags: Blacklisted, Blacklisting, First Amendment, Jesus BernalCategorised in: Blacklist, Blacklisted
This post was written by Jim Riley
8 Comments
This is America, Jim. The First Amendment promises freedom of speech. This means that the government cannot punish or hinder what you say so long as it isn’t causing proven damage. What it doesn’t do is promise freedom from consequences. People have the right to pull financial support and tell others why they did.
Maybe with the current administration, you’ll have some help. I doubt it, though, as it has already made very specific moves violating the First Amendment and its actual promise.
I’m well aware that this is America, but apparently you aren’t. You are advocating a Chinese communist style social index system where access to public jobs and contracts are dependent on what sort of opinions you express. Constitutional case law on this score is very clear. Why do you think we keep winning at the liberal Ninth Circuit? Hint: any INDIVIDUAL can engage in a boycott, but public agencies cannot. That would be an act of establishing “official approved think,” and that is just not America, nor is it the First Amendment.
P.S. Even our opponents admit this is the cae because they keep pretending they are not engaged in a boycott. Think about that. Think really hard.
Well said, Godspeed to you and your mission and may freedom always prevail
Thank you!
I had a flash memory of this farm and I remembered I enjoyed it when I was a kid. I finally found out that it was this exact farm and I’m horrified to find out who the owner is. I believe cancel culture can go too far and most times I’m skeptical when people try to put down a business over personal issues. However, I believe that if you are connecting your very controversal views to your business, you shouldn’t be surprised when people will have a problem with it. You are relying on people’s money and people spend their money at places they want to spend it. Why would I allow my money to profit someone who would cast a vote against me or kick me out for being a medical professional during COVID? Your actions lead to a loss in profit. And you continuously writing these blogs and posting all about your opinions will naturally repell business.
Thanks for visiting as a child. We’re glad you enjoyed it.
I suppose I will have to explain this until I’m blue in the face, (if you read the comments on these blogs, I’ve explained it dozens of times.)
Here it is: **Individuals** can boycott anyone they like. If, for example, progressive leftists resent my ridiculing the vicious, racist, antisemite, Louis Farrakhan, then they don’t have to spend their money here, and they can go to some farm that hates Jews, I guess. But **public agencies** cannot engage in boycotts or viewpoint discrimination. If they could, they could deny jobs to anyone who doesn’t have the approved opinions.
Oh, and Covid..
You might be surprised to know that a LOT of doctors, nurses, paramedics and their families enjoyed our farm during the lockdowns, because they believed public health had made some gross mistakes in ordering lockdowns, masks, distancing and a “vaccine” that had no long term testing.
..unless you believe doctors and academics never get the science wrong.