Connect with us

News from the South - Arkansas News Feed

Arkansas can outlaw public school ‘indoctrination’ and ‘critical race theory,’ appeals court rules 

Published

2 months ago

on

arkansasadvocate.com – Sonny Albarado – 2025-07-16 16:52:00


A federal appeals court upheld Arkansas’ LEARNS Act provision banning “indoctrination” in public schools, reversing a lower court’s preliminary injunction. The 8th Circuit ruled students do not have a First Amendment right to compel schools to teach specific content, including Critical Race Theory, as classroom instruction is government speech. The court emphasized that while students have free speech rights, the government controls curriculum and can decide what is taught. Although the ruling favors the state, it noted government speech is not immune from constitutional challenges. The court declined to address teachers’ due process claims due to procedural issues.

by Sonny Albarado, Arkansas Advocate
July 16, 2025

Arkansas’ ban on “indoctrination” in public schools doesn’t violate students’ free speech protections because the government has a right to dictate what is taught, a federal appeals court panel ruled Wednesday.

The three-judge panel from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out a lower court’s ruling that blocked enforcement of part of Arkansas’ 2023 education overhaul law. The panel sent the case back to the district court for further proceedings.

U.S. District Judge Lee Rudofsky in May 2024 granted a preliminary injunction against the section of the LEARNS Act that prohibits “indoctrination” in public schools. Section 16 of the law specifically bans the teaching of “Critical Race Theory.” Rudofsky’s ruling applied only to the students who had sued, not the Little Rock High School teacher who was also a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

The suit argued that the “indoctrination” section of the law violated the U.S. Constitution’s First and Fourteenth Amendments, which guarantee the rights of free speech and due process, respectively.

Arkansas officials appealed the preliminary injunction, arguing free speech protections don’t mean students can demand that public schools teach certain topics. The appellate panel agreed in its 18-page ruling, written by U.S. Circuit Judge L. Steven Grasz. Circuit Judges James B. Loken and Raymond W. Gruender were the other members of the panel.

“The students concede the classroom materials and instruction they seek to receive constitute government speech. This is fatal to their likelihood of success because the government’s own speech ‘is not restricted by the Free Speech Clause,’ so it is free to ‘choose what to say and what not to say,’” the panel said, quoting from a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Shurtleff v. City of Boston.

“Since the Free Speech Clause does not give the students the right to compel the government to say something it does not wish to, they cannot show a likelihood of success,” the appeals court ruling said.

Attorney General Tim Griffin in a statement called the appeals court ruling “an important win for the LEARNS Act and for the rule of law. With its ruling today, the Eighth Circuit continues to ensure that the responsibility of setting curriculum is in the hands of democratically elected officials who, by nature, are responsive to voters.”

The panel also ruled the district court erred in granting the preliminary injunction based on the likelihood the students might succeed on their argument that the First Amendment protects a person’s right to receive information. While students have a free-speech right to receive information, they can’t dictate what schools include in their curriculum, the panel said.

“Though a listener’s right to receive information means the government cannot stop a willing private speaker from disseminating his message, that right cannot be used to require the government to provide a message it no longer is willing to say,” according to the appeals panel.

“We do not minimize the students’ concern … about a government that decides to exercise its discretion over the public school curriculum by prioritizing ideological interests over educational ones,” the panel wrote. “But the Constitution does not give courts the power to block government action based on mere policy disagreements.”

The First Amendment right to receive information doesn’t authorize a court to require the state to retain curriculum materials or instruction, “even if such information was removed for political reasons,” the ruling said. “Since the speech belongs to the government, it gets to control what it says.”

In spite of its ruling in favor of the state’s position, the panel noted: “Government speech is not immune from all constitutional challenges, and our holding does not suggest otherwise.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The due process argument

The district court’s preliminary injunction excluded the teachers who sued because, Rudofsky wrote, they did not show irreparable harm arising from Section 16 of the LEARNS Act.

The teachers had argued the law forced them to self-censor in their classroom instruction, but Rudofsky ruled that the speech they were allegedly censoring was the state’s, not theirs. The teachers also argued that the law’s indoctrination section was so vague that it violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause.

The teachers filed motions in the appeal making similar arguments, but the appellate panel declined to consider the vagueness claim because the teachers didn’t file a separate appeal.

Arkansas Advocate Editor Sonny Albarado can be reached at salbarado@arkansasadvocate.com

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

SUPPORT

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Arkansas can outlaw public school ‘indoctrination’ and ‘critical race theory,’ appeals court rules  appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com


Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

This article presents the legal ruling on Arkansas’ LEARNS Act banning “indoctrination” in schools with a clear emphasis on judicial deference to state authority over curriculum. The language and framing largely reflect a perspective supportive of limiting classroom content according to elected officials’ decisions, aligning with conservative views on education and opposition to Critical Race Theory. However, the article also includes relevant legal context and quotes from both sides without overt editorializing, maintaining some balance. The overall tone and focus on upholding governmental control over curriculum suggest a center-right leaning in its presentation.

Related Topics:

News from the South - Arkansas News Feed

Sylvan Hills defeats Maumelle in Zero Week thriller

Published

2 days ago

on

August 28, 2025

By

www.youtube.com – THV11 – 2025-08-28 23:12:00

SUMMARY: Sylvan Hills ended a 20-game losing streak by defeating Maumelle 55-54 in a thrilling zero-week high school football game. Despite trailing at times, the Bears showcased resilience with key plays from Bubba Johnson and Tyler Hampton, tying the game 28-28 at halftime. Maumelle’s Levi Warrior made impressive catches, keeping the Hornets competitive. In the closing seconds, Maumelle nearly secured the win, but a controversial goal-line stop gave Sylvan Hills the victory. This dramatic opener signals an exciting 2025 season ahead, marking Sylvan Hills’ first win in two years and an intense start for both teams.

Sylvan Hills breaks a 20 game losing streak with a 55-54 win over.

Source

Continue Reading

News from the South - Arkansas News Feed

Catholic community in Fayetteville prays for Minneapolis victims, reflects on safety

Published

3 days ago

on

August 27, 2025

By

www.youtube.com – 40/29 News – 2025-08-27 21:29:53

SUMMARY: Father Jason Tyler of the Catholic community in Fayetteville reflects on the Minneapolis shooting, expressing sadness and anger over the senseless violence. He acknowledges the natural questioning of God’s presence during such tragedies. Despite the distance, the event feels close due to shared faith. Father Tyler assures families that St. Joseph prioritizes safety, with ongoing training for staff and recent security upgrades funded by grants. Counselors are available for students needing support, and he remains open to parents. He emphasizes the fragility of life and the importance of unity within communities as God’s people in response to such events.

Catholic community in Fayetteville prays for Minneapolis victims, reflects on safety

Subscribe to 40/29 on YouTube now for more: http://bit.ly/PTElbK

Get more Northwest Arkansas news: http://www.4029tv.com
Like us: http://facebook.com/4029news
Follow us: http://twitter.com/4029news
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/4029news/

Source

Continue Reading

News from the South - Arkansas News Feed

Trump administration says CDC chief ousted, but her lawyer says she hasn’t resigned or been fired

Published

4 days ago

on

August 27, 2025

By

arkansasadvocate.com – Jennifer Shutt – 2025-08-27 17:13:00


Susan Monarez, recently confirmed as CDC director, faces controversy after the Trump administration announced she is no longer leading the agency, though she has neither resigned nor been officially fired. Her attorneys claim she was targeted for refusing to follow unscientific political directives and remains committed to science and public health. The Department of Health and Human Services confirmed her departure on social media. Monarez was Trump’s second CDC nominee after Dave Weldon withdrew. Her confirmation was narrowly approved by the Senate. The dispute has sparked concerns about politicization of the CDC and prompted other public health officials to consider resigning.

by Jennifer Shutt, Arkansas Advocate
August 27, 2025

WASHINGTON — The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doesn’t appear inclined to leave her post, despite the Trump administration announcing Wednesday that she’s no longer running one of the country’s top public health agencies. 

Attorneys for Susan Monarez, who received Senate confirmation in late July, posted that she hasn’t been fired or resigned, but didn’t announce whether they plan to sue the administration. 

“When CDC Director Susan Monarez refused to rubber-stamp unscientific, reckless directives and fire dedicated health experts she chose protecting the public over serving a political agenda,” wrote Mark S. Zaid and Abbe David Lowell. “For that, she has been targeted. Dr. Monarez has neither resigned nor received notification from the White House that she has been fired, and as a person of integrity and devoted to science, she will not resign.”

The statement from Monarez’s attorneys came just hours after the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, wrote on social media that she was no longer running the agency. 

“Susan Monarez is no longer director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” the post stated. “We thank her for her dedicated service to the American people. @SecKennedy has full confidence in his team at@CDCgov who will continue to be vigilant in protecting Americans against infectious diseases at home and abroad.”

The Washington Post first reported the news. 

The U.S. Senate voted along party lines to confirm Monarez as CDC director in late July, giving her just weeks in one of the nation’s top public health roles.

Monarez’s last post on social media from her official account was on Aug. 22, marking the death of a police officer after a gunman opened fire at the CDC’s headquarters in Atlanta. 

“A large group of CDC employees and I attended today’s memorial for Officer David Rose, whose Tour of Duty ended on August 8 when he responded to shots fired,” Monarez wrote. “He leaves behind a legacy of love, courage, and service to the community that will never be forgotten.”

The dispute over Monarez’s position as CDC director appeared to potentially mark the beginning of a wave of resignations from other public health officials, including Director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Demetre C. Daskalakis.

“I am unable to serve in an environment that treats CDC as a tool to generate policies and materials that do not reflect scientific reality and are designed to hurt rather than to improve the public’s health,” Daskalakis wrote in a lengthy social media post. “The recent change in the adult and children’s immunization schedule threaten the lives of the youngest Americans and pregnant people.”

Monarez second choice after Weldon

Monarez was President Donald Trump’s second choice for CDC director. He originally selected former Florida U.S. Rep. Dave Weldon to run the CDC shortly after he secured election to the Oval Office in November. But the White House pulled Weldon’s nomination in March, after it appeared he couldn’t secure the votes needed for confirmation.

Later that month, Trump announced his plans to nominate Monarez in a social media post.

“Dr. Monarez brings decades of experience championing Innovation, Transparency, and strong Public Health Systems,” Trump wrote. “She has a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, and PostDoctoral training in Microbiology and Immunology at Stanford University School of Medicine.

“As an incredible mother and dedicated public servant, Dr. Monarez understands the importance of protecting our children, our communities, and our future. Americans have lost confidence in the CDC due to political bias and disastrous mismanagement. Dr. Monarez will work closely with our GREAT Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert Kennedy Jr. Together, they will prioritize Accountability, High Standards, and Disease Prevention to finally address the Chronic Disease Epidemic and, MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN!”

Restoring trust in CDC

Monarez testified in front of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions in June as part of her confirmation process. The committee voted 12-11 in July to send her nomination to the Senate floor, where Republicans approved her to the post later that month. 

Chairman Bill Cassidy, R-La., said during the committee’s markup that he believed Monarez would put science first and help to restore public trust in the agency. 

“The United States needs a CDC director who makes decisions rooted in science, a leader who will reform the agency and work to restore public trust in health institutions,” Cassidy said at the time. “With decades of proven experience as a public health official, Dr. Monarez is ready to take on this challenge.”

Last updated 6:59 p.m., Aug. 27, 2025

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Trump administration says CDC chief ousted, but her lawyer says she hasn’t resigned or been fired appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com


Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This content exhibits a center-left political bias through its framing of Susan Monarez as a public health figure targeted for standing up to “unscientific, reckless directives” under the Trump administration, emphasizing her commitment to science and integrity. The article highlights criticism of political interference in public health agencies and portrays Monarez’s ousting in a critical light, which aligns with perspectives more commonly found on the center-left. While it presents direct quotes from officials and references bipartisan actions, the tone and selection of details suggest a tilt toward defending established scientific leadership against politically motivated decisions associated with the right-wing Trump administration.

Continue Reading

Trending