Mediaboss Marketing

Stephen Davis: Eye on Education

Two hot-button issues have recently emerged in the ongoing debate surrounding academic freedom and free speech in public schools.

One issue centers on concerns related to the inclusion of critical race theory in American school curricula (e.g., systemic racial discrimination in society). The other centers on the U.S. Supreme Courts recent ruling in favor of a former high school cheerleader who was punished by her school for posting profane comments about the school on Snapchat while she was off school grounds.

Both examples contain important implications for how public schools manage controversial issues.

Before addressing the merits of each, it is important to note that academic freedom and free speech are closely related legal concepts that have somewhat different implications for universities and public schools. The modern concept of academic freedom which emerged from 19th century German universities rests upon a broad intellectual landscape of ideas unconstrained by narrow partisan or political interests.

The U.S. Supreme Court stated, Our nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendental value to us all and not merely to the teachers concerned. . . . The First Amendment does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom.

However, the application of academic freedom in public schools is less clear and continues to be a topic of debate practically, politically and in the courts. While the U.S. Supreme Court has largely avoided ruling on academic freedom cases in public schools, lower courts have provided considerable guidance. In general, lower courts have protected local school boards and their authority to make curricular decisions influenced by community values and needs.

Moreover, courts have ruled that public schools are subject to state legislative authority and must conform to the education laws and regulations enacted by the state.

Importantly, while cases relating to academic freedom typically focus on the behaviors and practices of professional educators, cases relating to freedom of speech (more generally) have rendered important implications for both educators and students. In recent years, court cases related to freedom of speech in public schools have leaned in favor of more student expression rather than less.

Nevertheless, this distinction is not razor-sharp, and the rights of public school students are not unlimited.

In the Supreme Court case involving the high school cheerleader, the content of the students speech was profane and objectionable. However, it did not rise to the level of a material disruption to the school. No one was threatened or slandered. Moreover, the student posted her comments from home on her personal computer on a widely used social network.

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote, . . . sometimes it is necessary to protect the superfluous in order to preserve the necessary. Breyers comment echoed the courts earlier ruling that, students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.

The debate over critical race theory, also tethered to the First Amendment, is amplified most by differing political perspectives. Importantly, state legislatures and local school boards possess sole authority to determine what is taught and how. Individual schools, teachers, administrators and labor unions have no independent authority to ignore or modify state laws and local board policies.

The ideas that define critical race theory are not new. To varying degrees, states and local school districts have been addressing elements of the theory for nearly 50 years. There are important arguments made by advocates and opponents of the theory that ultimately must be processed through rigorous public debate and policy-making processes.

While I believe that to the extent possible, public schools ought to be included in the open marketplace of ideas, it is particularly important that students are not sheltered from controversial ideas that are based upon thoughtful arguments and alternative interpretations.

After all, a central mission of public education is to help students become independent, open-minded, ethical and creative thinkers.

Stephen Davis is a career educator who writes a column that publishes every other Wednesday in the Daily Republic. Reach him by email at[emailprotected].

Related

Read the original post:
Eye on Education: Addressing First Amendment controversies in public schools - Fairfield Daily Republic

On June 24, a U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. heard arguments over whether three, billion-dollar defamation suits brought by Denver-based Dominion Voting Systems against Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell and Mike Lindell should go to trial.

The issue before Judge Carl J. Nichols was whether the defendants repeated claims of election fraud, including claims that Dominions software could somehow switch votes, were protected speech under the First Amendment and, therefore, not worthy of taking before a jury.

The bar for winning a libel or defamation suit is high, and trials are expensive, so it is typical for defendants to seek dismissal. But Judge Nichols must also weigh a bigger question: What is the harm in allowing this defamation case to proceed to trial and letting a jury weigh the evidence and decide?

That was the question before Denver District Court Judge John Coughlin in the mid-1990s in Smileys Too, Inc. v. Denver Post Corp., a suit brought over an article that described complaints against Smileys, a dry cleaner, on file at the Denver District Attorneys office. Because Chance Conner, a reporter working for me when I was the business editor at The Post, wrote the article, I became the point person on staff for our defense.

In the Dominion case, much will turn not just on whether the claims by Giuliani, Powell, Lindell and others are false. In all likelihood, they will have to be shown to have been produced with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth, in other words, the defendants knew the statements were false and repeated them anyway.

This very high bar exists because the defense claims that Dominion Systems is a public figure, subject to a higher standard than a private citizen. Is Dominion Systems a public figure or simply a private company that happens to supply voting systems under contract to government entities? That, too, might be an important issue for a jury to weigh at trial.

In Colorado, the public figure rule also applies to matters of general public concern and in the case of Smileys, the question of this broad definition of a public figure in libel cases was before the court.

Another question for Judge Nichols is whether Dominion can demonstrate it was damaged by the false statements. It claims $1.3 billion in damages though the defense has argued that any possible damages are to its reputation and not to its bottom line, therefore not as clear cut as Dominion claims.

In the case of Smileys, Judge Coughlin decided that it was worth having a jury hear the evidence and decide whether public figure rules applied, whether our reporting was accurate and whether damages had occurred.

If Judge Nichols orders the case to trial, it will be up to Giuliani, Powell and Lindell to make the case for why their statements are backed up by the truth or why they deserve protection as opinion under the First Amendment. Dominion Systems will get a chance to collect evidence about what the defendants knew, when they knew it and what they did or didnt do with that knowledge.

The Posts defense in Smileys was to assume that the higher standard would not apply and stand by our story. The jury found our reporting was a fair and accurate report of the DAs complaints and exonerated The Post.

And yes, the jury agreed that a persons laundry was a matter of general public concern. Twenty-five years ago, on June 27, 1996, a Colorado appellate court affirmed the jury verdict, effectively ending the matter.

The Dominion case has drawn national attention and the trial will take place with millions paying attention. But the basic issues remain the same. Were the statements truthful? Were they protected as opinion? Is Dominion a public figure? Were there material damages?

I came away from the Smileys experience with great respect for the jury system. Trials in First Amendment cases should be rare, but in matters of vital national interest especially when the integrity of elections are the issue letting 12 citizens decide could be good for America.

Henry Dubroff is a former Denver Post business editor who now owns the weekly journal for the Central Coast of California and divides his time between Denver and the West Coast.

Go here to read the rest:
Opinion: If Dominions defamation suits go to trial, it could be good for America - The Denver Post

Glasgow plays host to the final tie of Euro 2020's round of 16 on Tuesday as Sweden and Ukraine face off in what may be one of the most closely fought knockout ties yet. Janne Anderson's Swedish side topped Group D off the back of a thrilling late win over Poland but have not necessarily blown away any of their opponents so far in this tournament.

Meanwhile Ukraine made it through to the last 16 as one of the three best-performing sides who finished third in their group and have one win to their name from games against the Netherlands, North Macedonia and Austria. Here is how you can watch the match and what you need to know:

Craving even more coverage of the world's game? Listen below and follow Qu Golazo! A Daily CBS Soccer Podcast where we take you beyond the pitch and around the globe for commentary, previews, recaps and more.

Sweden: Andriy Shevhcenko certainly seems to believe that Sweden's greatest success may come from the dead balls with Anderson's side blessed with strength and size across the XI but perhaps lacking the open play guile that will be needed in the deepest stages of the competition.

"We have to be very cautious at set pieces because Sweden make great use of them," the Ukraine manager said in his pre-match press conference. "It will also be very important to win second balls. There will be a lot of battling on the pitch, and of course, we need to be effective up front."

Ukraine: Though they started the tournament impressively in defeat to the Dutch there will be cause for concern from Shevchenko at how his side performed in the defeat to Austria, a match where Ukraine created shooting chances worth just 0.3 expected goals. Aside from Atalanta's Ruslan Malinovskyi this team seems to lack the creativity required to carve open teams, indeed the No.8 completed half of the mere four passes that were made into the Austrian half.

They could find similar problems grinding down the Swedish defense, which for much of their 3-2 win over Poland did rather well at limiting service to Robert Lewandowski. It should be even easier for Victor Lindelof and Marcus Danielson against Roman Yaremchuk.

This is unlikely to be a game of high quality attacking moments but Alexander Isak, Emil Forsberg and Dejan Kulusevski might just provide the necessary cutting edge for the Swedes. Pick: Sweden 1 Ukraine 0

Read more here:
Sweden vs. Ukraine: Euro 2020 live stream, TV channel, how ...

There are few big games in the life of any manager when he can stand on the touchline, take a deep draught of the night air, reflect on his fine work, and quite frankly - enjoy the occasion, but for a solid 30 minutes in Rome that was the privilege of Gareth Southgate.

He now stands clear as the second-greatest England manager of all-time, behind only Sir Alf Ramsey, who is the other to have taken the national team to two consecutive semi-finals at major international tournaments. No-one will forget this July evening in Rome when Ukraine were flattened by three second half goals in the space of 19 minutes and the great tournament anxiety of England was replaced by something unexpected a second half that was la dolce vita. A cruise into the semi-finals where Denmark await on Wednesday at Wembley.

This was, once again, something beautiful for England. They have tamed Euro 2020 thus far to the extent that they arrive back in London in the early hours of Sunday morning having not yet conceded a goal in five tournament games. What strange sorcery is this? Nothing more complicated than another masterclass from Harry Maguire and John Stones, two assists for their left-back accomplice Luke Shaw, and this despite a second half change of four players including two to protect those for whom a suspension threatened.

At the other end, two more goals for Harry Kane, the old marksman once again picking off his targets. There was a goal from the unstoppable Maguire. Then, in the 63rd minute, a collectors item for all those England fans who had embarked to Rome from their Covid-safe destinations across Europe: Jordan Henderson scored. It had only taken him 62 caps, 3,997 international minutes, and at least one that was disallowed, for his first England goal. The thought occurred: are England starting to showboat?

For Southgate the challenges of this game dissolved, and he could enjoy how far his team has come. Declan Rice and Kalvin Phillips, both superb in their control, despite the yellow cards hanging over them, were summoned for a breather. So too Sterling and Kane, and through four substitutions, Southgate still had Phil Foden and Jack Grealish on the bench. There was a time when Southgate was being told he could not win without the pair. And that time was about two weeks ago.

They took the lead within three minutes and 34 seconds of the game, although the first half was close that goal from Kane forcing Ukraine to abandon the dense yellow wheatfield of five defenders and three screening midfielders. Their new impetus challenged England in the first half, when Roman Yaremchuk was a threat and Kyle Walker seemed to have lost his bearings again. Ukraine were in the match and then very quickly they were out the tournament as their second half collapsed.

Read more:
England vs Ukraine, Euro 2020 quarter-final: Kick-off time, TV channel and how to watch live tonight - The Telegraph

The former striker has taken his country further than they've ever been in a major competition, and is eager for the journey to continue

Andriy Shevchenko has told his Ukraine players that they shouldn't be scared of England, while insisting that "anything is possible" in the Euro 2020 quarter-final clash.

Ukraine booked their place in the last eight of the European Championships for the first time in their history by beating Sweden 2-1 after extra time in the Round of 16.

Shevchenko's side will now start preparing for a meeting with England, who recorded a 2-0 victory over Germany in the first knockout stage, with the 44-year-old well aware of the threat the Three Lions will pose in Rome on Saturday night.

England are a great team, they have a deep bench, an outstanding coaching staff and we are fully aware how tough this game is going to be," the Ukraine boss told reporters after the Sweden win.

"I saw all their three group matches, not today's win over Germany because we had to prepare for our own game with Sweden.

"They are incredibly difficult to score against but their strength shouldn't scare us.

"It should motivate us because everything is possible in football as in life and we will play our hearts out to give our fans even more to cheer about."

Ukraine opened their Euros campaign with a 3-2 defeat to the Netherlands, but impressed after initially battling back from two goals down before conceding a late winner.

They followed up that encouraging display with a 2-1 victory over North Macedonia, and despite losing their final Pool C fixture 1-0 against Austria, advanced to the last 16 as one of the four best third-placed nations.

Ukraine then produced their best performance yet against Sweden, with Manchester City star Zinchenko opening the scoring with a powerful strike just before the hour mark.

Emil Forsberg scored an equaliserto force extra time, but the Swedes were left with a mountain to climb after seeing Marcus Danielson sent off in the 99th minute, with Dovbyk eventually heading home the winner to send Shevchenko and his staff into raptures on the touchline.

The latest European Championships have thrown up more than a few surprises withFrance, Portugal, Germany and the Netherlands already out, and Ukraine will fancy their chances of claiming another major scalp at the weekend.

However, England will be heavy favourites to reach the quarter-finals after recording four consecutive clean sheets, with the winner set to be rewarded with a last-four tie against either Czech Republic or Denmark.

Follow this link:
'England shouldn't scare us' - Shevchenko says 'anything is possible' for Ukraine in quarter-final clash - Goal.com