Get a free copy of Parental Rights & Education when you subscribe to our newsletter!
A first grader was harshly punished and forced to apologize for giving her friend an innocent drawing that the principal and teachers deemed “racist” and inconsistent with the school’s “values.”
A mother is appealing her daughter’s case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit following her daughter’s punishment for drawing a picture for her friend.
In 2021, a first-grade class at Viejo Elementary School in Mission Viejo, California, was read a book about Martin Luther King Jr. and that contained the phrase “Black Lives Matter.”
The book caused one girl, known in legal filings as B.B., to feel bad for her minority classmate and friend, referred to as M.C. Though she did not understand what “Black Lives Matter” meant, she drew a picture for M.C. to make her feel included.
B.B., who is white, put the (misspelled) phrase “Black Lives Mater” at the top of the picture. Lower in the picture B.B. drew four circles of different colors meant to be her and her friends of different skin colors holding hands. Under “Black Lives Mater” she wrote: “any life”.
She gave the picture to M.C., who thanked her and put the picture in her backpack.
When M.C.’s mother found the picture, she contacted the school and said she would not “tolerate any more messages given to [M.C.] at school because of her skin color.”
Principal Jesus Becerra said that writing “any life” was inconsistent with the values taught at the school, but he and M.C.’s parents agreed that the girl’s motives were innocent and the parents said they did not want B.B. to be punished.
Becerra did punish B.B., however. He said that the drawing was racist and inappropriate and forced B.B. to apologize to M.C. Both girls were confused about why B.B. was apologizing.
He banned B.B. from drawing and giving pictures to classmates at school.
B.B.’s teachers then banned her from recess for two weeks. She was forced to sit on the bench and watch the other children play.
B.B.’s parents were not told about the drawing or the punishment until around a year later.
The issue led B.B.’s mother, Chelsea Boyle, to file a lawsuit against the school district and Becerra.
On February 22, 2024, a federal district court dismissed B.B.’s case.
The court argued that under the Supreme Court’s ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, schools may restrict student speech that “might reasonably lead school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities’ or that collides ‘with the rights of other students to be secure and let alone.”
The district court also said that the determination on whether speech is inappropriate is left to schools rather than courts.
Featuring prominently in their reasoning was that the girl’s age was relevant to the ruling. According to the court, speech that is generally protected in higher grades is not protected in lower grades, and elementary schools are given latitude to police students’ speech.
Pacific Legal Foundation, the attorneys representing B.B.’s family, filed an appeal on July 15 at the Ninth Circuit. They argued,
“The evidence here (primarily deposition testimony) confirms that B.B.’s drawing was innocent and that her classmate, M.C., did not understand the drawing as anything other than a nice gesture. Without evidence showing substantial disruption in school resulting from certain speech, or that particular students were targeted with ‘inflammatory’ or tortious speech, school officials have no basis to limit a student’s ‘pure speech.’”
Neither child understood any connection between B.B. writing “any life” and the alleged racism of the phrase “all lives matter,” which itself is disputed. The district court cited only a New York Times article that claimed some find the phrase “all lives matter” to be racially insensitive.
There was no classroom disruption and M.C.’s right to “be let alone” was not interfered with.
The appeal also states that the district court ignored the opinion in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, wherein the Supreme Court ruled that the school could not require two students who were Jehovah’s Witnesses to recite the pledge of allegiance. Those elementary school students were 8 and 11 years old. The Supreme Court did not see their age as an issue in protecting their right to free speech.
The appeal claims that the district court shirked its duty by deferring to the school and calls on the Ninth Circuit to rule in favor of B.B.
Children do not understand woke concepts of racism. A first-grade class was read a book that contained the phrase “Black Lives Matter” and the symbol of a raised fist.
As was likely intended, the book made B.B feel bad, though rather than respond with self-flagellation and white guilt, as woke ideologues desire, B.B. responded by trying to comfort her friend of another skin color.
B.B. did what any rational and kind-hearted person would do: furthered unity. She even included the left’s mandatory phrase of “Black Lives Matter” because to a first grader with no knowledge of political slogans, “Black Lives Matter” means what it says: that all black people matter. She then wrote “any life” because when talking about racism and human value, the sane response is to say that any life of any color matters.
M.C. seemed to understand it for what it was: a kind gift from her friend, a gift of love and acceptance.
All sane, rational people would read B.B.’s message as a touching and heartwarming lesson in humanity. What else would she mean by such a present?
The left isn’t sane, though, and when its adherents see a first grader reaching out to a friend of a different color, they see racism.
“Clearly she meant ‘all lives matter,’ which everyone knows is code for white supremacy!” shouts the unhinged left.
First graders aren’t steeped in political rhetoric or cultish devotion to racist viewpoints. They see things for what they are. My friend drew me a picture and said my life matters, why does she need to apologize?
The response by Becerra and the teachers was abhorrent. Who tells a first grader who made such a loving gesture that she is racist? And rather than encourage her to continue to express such warmth, what kind of person would ban her from drawing any more pictures? What kind of school official would squash a child’s kindness and artistic expression? That is borderline psychotic.
Maybe instead of reprimanding a first grader, these so-called educators could reflect and learn a few things about how to treat others from these kind and precious children.
As seen in this article, many K-12 schools now embrace the secular woke agenda and are hostile to Christian beliefs and parental rights. Fortunately, parents don’t have to settle for this. Liberty University Online Academy is a K-12 program designed to educate your children in the ways of the Lord while preparing them to stand firm in their faith when they graduate. Our flexible online curriculum ensures that your student is trained at your convenience and keeps YOU the ultimate educator of your children.
