Social Justice Lessons Challenged by Nevada Student


Reporter’s Notebook: I’m so glad I don’t have a child in post-secondary school anymore, I’d be in prison by now…

A Las Vegas, Nevada high school senior is suing a taxpayer-funded charter school over its Critical Race Theory-based curriculum.

Filed Dec. 22 in federal court, William Clark claims his First and 14th Amendment rights are being violated after being told that by refusing to identify with an oppressive group, he is exercising his privilege and underscoring his role as an oppressor. The student at Democracy Prep, whose mother is black and deceased father was white, said there’s a hostile classroom environment, and is being discriminated against in the mandatory, year-long “Sociology of Change” course required for graduation.

The courses require students to ‘unlearn’ and ‘fight back’ against ‘oppressive’ structures in their family arrangements, religious beliefs and practices, racial, sexual, and gender identities, all of which they are required to divulge and subject to non-private interrogation. He was also required “to reveal his racial, sexual, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities and religious identities” by his teacher, who greeted students by saying, “Hello, my wonderful social justice warriors!”

Clark was told the next step would be to determine if parts of his identity “have privilege or oppression attached to it,” and where privilege was defined as “the inherent belief in the inferiority of the oppressed group.” The school repeatedly threatened Clark “with material harm including a failing grade and non-graduation if he failed to comply with their requirements.”

The lawsuit comes after President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13950 on Sept. 22 prohibiting the military, federal agencies, and federal contractors from promoting the “divisive concepts” that are part of Critical Race Theory in workplace training sessions.

U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman, an Obama appointee, however, issued a preliminary nationwide injunction against the order, agreeing with an LGBT diversity training organization that argued the order violated its free speech rights.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.