June 13, 2013 Sent via Certified Mail RRR # 7009 2820 0002 0779 5365 Joshua Independent School District School Board Members Ronnie Galbreath David Taylor Chris Ohlsen Gene Loflin Myra Pruitt Taffy Ward Jason Moss, and Joshua Independent School District Superintendent Fran Marek P.O. Box 40 Joshua, Texas 76058-3117 Dear Superintendent Marek and Board Members: Remington Reimer retained Liberty Institute to represent him in this matter. As such, please direct all correspondence to me. This letter serves as formal notice under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Chapter 110 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code. 1 As the Joshua High School (JHS) class valedictorian, Remington earned the privilege of speaking to his classmates at the JHS graduation ceremony, which t ook place on June 6, 2013. Remington informed Liberty Institute about the unfortunate circumstances surrounding the ceremony. It is our understanding that, on several occasions prior to the graduation ceremony, JHS officials met with three JHS students- the Salutatorian, the Class Historian, and Remington as Valedictorian- who were selected to give speeches at the graduation ceremony. JHS officials advised the three students that school officials must review and approve their speeches prior to the graduation ceremony. On June 5, 2013, the day prior to the ceremony, JHS officials further advised the three students that any student who deviated from their pre-approved speech would have his or her microphone turned off during their speech. Accordingly, Remington provided a copy of hi s proposed speech to Cheryl Adkins, a JHS faculty member who was in charge of the graduation ceremony. Ms. Adkins 1 School officials substanti ally burdened Mr. Reimer' s religious liberty, and they had no compelling interest to do so, nor did they use the least rest r icti ve mea ns to advance any governmental interest. 2001 West Plano Parkway, Suite 1600 Plano, Texas 75075 Phone: 972.941.4444 Libertylnstitute.org reviewed the speech and then turned it over to JHS assistant principal Stan McVey. Assistant Principal McVey informed Remington that his speech was not approved and instructed him to re-write his speech, which he did. After reviewing Remington's revised speech, Assistant Principal McVey approved it and turned it over to JHS principal Mick Cochran for further review. Upon reviewing Remington's speech, Principal Cochran informed Lieutenant Colonel CUCol) Davidson, the JHS Naval Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps instructor, that he thought the speech could use further editing by LtCol Davidson. LtCol Davidson requested that Remington provide him with his speech for yet another review, which Remington did. Upon his review, LtCol Davidson edited a substantial portion of it. Thus, Remington re-wrote his speech and submitted it a third time. This time, after review and editing by no fewer than four JHS officials, Remington's revised speech received JHS approval. On the evening of the graduation ceremony, Remington delivered the entire speech that JHS officials had reviewed, revised, and approved beforehand. But when Remington continued speaking beyond what had been reviewed and approved, JHS officials turned off his microphone. The portion of Remington's speech that he was not permitted to complete consisted of twelve sentences. No portion of Remington's speech contained any obscenity or vulgarity. On Friday, June 7, 2013, JHS Principal Mick Cochran met with Remington's father, Todd Reimer, and informed him that he intended to punish Remington for his perceived misdeed during the graduation ceremony. Specifically, he threatened to send a letter to the United States Naval Academy where Remington will matriculate in June 2013, advising them that Remington has poor character, or words to that effect. But after consulting with a JISD attorney, Principal Cochran temporarily retracted his threat. As of this letter, Principal Cochran has not stated his intended action. Pursuant to the Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act CRVAA), Tex. Educ. Code 25.151-.157, Joshua ISO adopted policy FNA (local). As required by policy FNA (local) and RV AA, Joshua ISO created a limited public forum for valedictorians to deliver their own message. FNA (local) does not provide for a prior review of the speech of a valedictorian and for good reason. ((The content of each student-speaker's message is the private expression of the individual student and does not reflect the endorsement, sponsorship, position, or expression of the District." FNA (local). In fact, FNA (local) requires this exact statement disclaiming involvement in the creation of the speech of the valedictory address as well as the speeches of the other student- speakers to be printed in the graduation program. School officials, however, failed to follow FNA (local) on a number of levels, including failing to print the disclaimer in the graduation program. As such, the school officials in charge of the graduation ceremony violated state law and the policy established by the Joshua ISO Board of Trustees. If school officials had followed the Board's policy, graduation would have taken place without controversy. We recommend the Board take action to ensure all school officials follow Board policy for graduations in the future. 2 Another reason FNA (local) does not provide for prior review of a valedictory address is that "[i]t has long been held that ordinances regulating speech contingent on the will of an official - such as the requirement of a license or permit that may be withheld or granted in the discretion of an official-are unconstitutional burdens on speech classified as prior restraints." Chiu v. Plano Ind. Sch. Dist., 339 F.3d 273, 280-81 (5th Cir. 2003) (citing Staub v. City of Baxley, 355 U.S. 313, 322 (1958). In addition, a "prior restraint, while not per se unconstitutional, bears a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity. See Id. Moreover, "a law subjecting the exercise of First Amendment freedoms to the prior restraint of a license, without narrow, objective, and definite standards to guide the licensing authority, is unconstitutional. " Id. (internal citations omitted); see also Shanley v. Northeast Independent School District, Bexar County Texas, 462 F.2d 960 (5th Cir. 1972) (noting that "the purpose of any screening regulation . . . is to prevent disruption and not to stifle expression"). The Joshua ISO Board adopted an appropriate policy to avoid the problems related to prior review schemes. School officials in charge of the graduation should have followed the policy. Instead, the school officials entangled Joshua ISO in a constitutional violation unnecessarily. Finally, FNA (local) does not provide a prior-review scheme but instead requires the disclaimer to be printed in the graduation program because school-official involvement in the crafting of student speeches at graduation ceremonies risks loss of federal funding for Joshua ISO. Pursuant to the No Child Left Behind Act, 20 USc. 7904, the United States Department of Education drafted guidelines for student speech, including student speakers at graduation ceremonies. According to the Department of Education: Where students or other private graduation speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, however, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti -religious) content. To avoid any mistaken perception that a school endorses student or other private speech that is not in fact attributable to the school, school officials may make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech (whether religious or nonreligious) is the speaker's and not the school's. U.S. Dep't of Ed., Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, dated February 7, 2003. (http://www2.ed.gov /policy /gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer _guidance. html, last accessed on June 12, 2013) 3 We would like to meet with the Superintendent before June 24, 2013 to resolve the issues surrounding the Joshua High School graduation that took place on June 6, 2013. Specifically, we are seeking a public statement from Joshua ISO exonerating Remington Reimer of any wrongdoing. All he did was simply follow state law and Joshua ISO policy FNA (local). In addition, we are seeking a statement from Joshua ISO that in the future, school officials will follow FNA (local) and not deviate from Board policy or RVAA. cc: Sincerely, ' l L ~ Hiram Sasser Director of Litigation Liberty Institute United States Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan 400 Maryland Avenue, SW Washington, D.C. 20202 Attorney General of Texas, Greg Abbott P.O. Box 12548 Austin, TX 78711-2548 4
The Legal Project's Demand Letter On Behalf of Kasra Shhahosseini, Founder and President of UCI Irvine Student Group 'Ex-Muslims and Critics of Islam' To UCI Student Programming Board
Amanda S. Pierce, James Pierce, by His Mother Susan Pierce, and Susan Pierce, Individually v. Sullivan West Central School District and Rod McLaughlin, 379 F.3d 56, 2d Cir. (2004)