Can Teachers be Insurrectionists?

I think not.

“Do not be so open-minded that your brains fall out.” This admonition is attributed to so many writers that I’ll just claim it as my own.

The political events of recent days and weeks have aroused a great many educational debates.  Among the most vexing is the tension between First Amendment rights and the responsibilities of and expectations for educators.

The most urgent questions have arisen as a result of teachers, administrators and board members being identified as among the protestors and rioters at the January 6th assault on the Capitol.  I make the distinction between “protestors” and “rioters” in recognition of the fact that only hundreds of the protestors entered the Capitol or otherwise broke the law.

While the same issue arises for police departments, military units and other employers, the dilemma faced in schools and colleges is particularly complex.  When a plurality of Republicans believe that Democrats stole the 2020 election, it is inevitable that teachers and administrators will be among those who hold that and other “conservative” views.  So, what to do?

As the former head of a very progressive school, the question is especially interesting.  I’m sure there are schools in, rural Texas for example, where the dominant belief and value systems would place me - and I suspect most readers of this blog - in the distinct minority.  

In a short Education Week article,  the issues are well summarized.

When deciding how to proceed with discipline for involvement in or proximity to a violent insurrection, administrators should be asking three main questions, said Tom Hutton, interim executive director of the Education Law Association:

• Did the person break the law?

• Did the person break the school or district’s code of conduct?

• Could the person’s actions and behavior negatively affect their ability to effectively serve students in the classroom?

Answering the first two can be fairly simple, particularly if the person is charged with a crime.

Hutton emphasized too that “there’s a very strong strand in the law that upholds the authority of school districts to hold teachers to a level of behavior that may be higher than would apply to others,” including other school employees. Courts tend to justify that higher standard by pointing to teachers’ role in their community as civic leaders and role models, according to Hutton.

In this situation, determining whether attendance at the rally without breaching the Capitol affects a teacher’s ability in the classroom is difficult. One big question, Hutton said, is how courts will deal with people who were participating in, or supporting, seditious attempts to overthrow the government because they had internalized false information from right wing news media or QAnon conspiracy theories.

“Were they really trying to overthrow the government or believing all the propaganda about this election having been stolen somehow? If they innocently believed it, are they culpable if they didn’t do something that was trespassing?” Hutton said.

In most circumstances I’m somewhat of a First Amendment zealot, but not so much when considering responsibility for educating young folks.  In fact I would argue that a failure of education accounts for much of the right wing  ignorance that fueled the insurrection.

Educators have a profound obligation to the truth and to prepare students’ critical capacities for productive citizenship.   Discharging this obligation has grown more difficult during an era when false equivalence reigns.  For example, many Trump supporters cite Black Lives Matter protests as equivalent to the insurrection in order to accuse Democrats of being hypocrites.   If the difference between BLM and armed insurrection evades you, stop reading and go directly to the OAN website.  

Similarly, evolution and creationism are not equivalent.  Vaccination programs and anti-vaccine rhetoric are not equivalent.   Kenny G and Charlie Parker are not equivalent (couldn’t resist . . . sorry).

And, of course, constitutional rights ought not be conflated with immature entitlement.  In the often disingenuous debate over religious “liberty,” the right to impose religion is too often masquerading as the right to practice religion.  Freedom of speech is too often invoked as the petulant right to utter offensive things anywhere the speaker wishes.  Neither is constitutionally protected.   

To those who demand their right to organized prayers in school, I’d remind them of the other 23 hours in the day and the unlimited places they are free to pray all day.  Or to those who insist on the right to harangue a college audience with hate speech, I would offer the rejoinder: “I would defend your right to hate speech to my death.  But take it somewhere else, please.  Your rights in this regard end at the tip of my nose and your ideas stink to high heaven.”

Robust debate and the testing of ideas must be part of education.  Through my many years of teaching I often argued the conservative side lest my students too smugly and uncritically embraced the majority viewpoint.

But I would argue that any teacher who expressed, through attendance at a Stop the Steal rally, a belief in conspiracy theories is unsuited for the profession.  Seeking to overthrow the government is too high a bar.  A fervent belief in seditious nonsense is sufficient.   If such a teacher wishes to test a dismissal or disciplinary consequence in court, so be it.

The defense is easy:  We needn’t be so open minded that we let our brains fall out.

I welcome disagreement or debate.  Feel free to comment.