Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Virginia Model Policies on Protecting Students Show Differences in Constitutional Focus and Interpretation

—

by

sherlockj
in , , , ,

by James C. Sherlock

There is lots of interest, and not a little headline hyperbole, concerning the change in Virginia’s model policies designed to assure all children appropriate treatment at school.

Two different world views are apparent in the titles:

  • the Northam administration’s Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools (Northam Model Policies) and
  • the Youngkin Administration’s Model Policies on the Privacy, Dignity, and Respect for All Students and Parents in Virginia’s Public Schools (Youngkin Model Policies).

Both attorneys and general audiences will find interesting the way the authors of each document interpreted the United States Constitution.

Each referred to the first and 14th amendments. And Virginia laws. The differences in emphasis and interpretation were chosen to support their cases.

That is not surprising, but I think those differences make or break the case for the two policies.

I will let readers decide.

First Amendment.

  • Northam Model Policies:

The First Amendment protects freedom of speech and expression. Schools may not prevent students from expressing their identity. 

  • Youngkin Model Policies:

The Department is mindful of constitutional protections that prohibit governmental entities from requiring individuals to adhere to or adopt a particular ideological belief. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees religious freedom and prohibits the government from compelling speech that is contrary to an individual’s personal or religious beliefs.

Fourteenth Amendment. 

  • Northam Model Policies:

Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment: This clause guarantees every citizen equal protection under the law. It protects LGBTQ+ youth in schools from unfair or discriminatory school actions.  

  • Youngkin Model Policies:

The Department also fully acknowledges the rights of parents to exercise their fundamental rights granted by the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to direct the care, upbringing, and education of their children.

Virginia laws.

A parent has a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parent’s child.

  • Youngkin Model Policies put it front and center.

The Code of Virginia reaffirms the rights of parents to determine how their children will be raised and educated. Empowering parents is not only a fundamental right, but it is essential to improving outcomes for all children in Virginia. [Link added.]

  • But the Youngkin document failed to officially cite other “related laws” cited by the Northam policy.

Bottom line.

Northam Model policies emphasized specific protections for transgender youth, and in its model policies treated those students’ rights as transcendent.

Youngkin Model Policies focused on “Privacy, Dignity, and Respect for All Students and Parents,” among whom transgender students are included.

The differences in stated interpretations of the constitution and in citations of related laws tell readers all they need to know about where the two model policies have headed.

The rest is details.

I suspect we will see these differing constitutional interpretations and “related laws” in court.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

84 responses to “Virginia Model Policies on Protecting Students Show Differences in Constitutional Focus and Interpretation”

  1. vicnicholls Avatar
    vicnicholls

    Love it – Youngkin’s interpretation works for all. No ones’ fantasy entitles them to forced speech and forced entry into closed spaces where some who have been violated relive it all over again, or fear using those spaces due to TRUE reports of violence against them.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      “Fantasy”? This kind of denigration of people’s deep psychological needs is what has led to these situations.

      1. vicnicholls Avatar
        vicnicholls

        Fantasy. You are not what you claim. I claim to be the Governor of Va. so let me move into the Mansion. Its the same thing. Deep seated psych needs? Most of these are kids who have deep psych needs thanks to the indoctrination and hatred that non factual policies have created in kids. Why is this not happening in other countries the same as it is here? Hint: its because the issues are due to something else. This is a phase many went thru and got out of long before this now started happening. How do you explain the sky high rate and the detransition rate that your side wants silenced?

        1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
          Dick Hall-Sizemore

          It is happening in other countries. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lesterfeder/this-is-how-23-countries-feel-about-transgender-rights

          1. vicnicholls Avatar
            vicnicholls

            Not everyone wants this mess. In addition, it makes a # of groups unwelcome: females, Muslims, Jews, Amish, Mennonite, Christians, etc. Considering the rapes in the LCPS bathrooms that were covered up, with a father who they threw the book at, and the rape/pregnancy in prison, the other issues, people have had enough. https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/prison-inmate-pregnant-after-state-lets-biological-men-into-womens-prison/
            https://meaww.com/prisoner-amber-jackson-claims-trans-and-female-inmates-having-sex-in-calif-jail-transgender-bill
            https://wbckfm.com/california-supply-womans-prisons-condoms-biological-men-housed-prisons/
            https://womensliberationfront.org/news/ca-womens-prisons-anticipate-pregnancy-sb123
            https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/former-governor-urges-prison-service-to-change-trans-policy-3303150
            https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/anger-trans-inmates-revert-males-25840252

      2. vicnicholls Avatar
        vicnicholls

        Deep seated? How come this big push for trans only came after indoctrination in schools, etc and isn’t happening in other countries? Hint its because its the latest fad. If you read kids’ statements on it, especially detransitioners who have been lied to, you would have known. Read both sides of the argument please Dick.

  2. Kathleen Smith Avatar
    Kathleen Smith

    Youngkin’s policies are doable, Northam’s are not. The Supreme Court prior to its new justices may have sided with Northam.

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      How is it doable to have a policy that says trans students can’t use bathrooms assigned to their gender… except the same policy says they can per Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board…? So they actually can even though he says they can’t…??

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        I think you meant “trans students can’t use….:

        1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          Yes, fixed… thanks…

  3. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Just put ’em on a bus to P-Town.

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Just put ’em on a bus to P-Town.

  5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    So Youngkin contends that parents have a fundamental right to raise their children as they deem best and that the “state” can not undermine that right. But if a parent wants the state to address their trans child in accordance with her their gender, suddenly Youngkin says the supposed 1st amendment rights of the school staff negates those fundamental parental rights. This sends a very conflated message. Is this the Conservative position now?

    1. Rosie Avatar
      Rosie

      Some animals are more equal than others.

    2. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      well yes, and calling it a “policy” is amusing… but it’s where Conservatives are these days.

    3. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Consistency is the hobgoblin of Conservatism.

    4. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      You wrote:

      “But if a parent wants the state to address their trans child in accordance with her their gender, suddenly Youngkin says the supposed 1st amendment rights of the school staff negates those fundamental parental rights”.

      That is not correct as I read the policy. The actual Youngkin policy on that point:

      “Schools shall defer to parents to make the best decisions with respect to their children: Parents are in the best position to work with their children and, where appropriate, their children’s health care providers to determine (a) what names, nicknames, and/or pronouns, if any, shall be used for their child by teachers and school staff while their child is at school, (b) whether their child engages in any counseling or social transition at school that encourages a gender that differs from their child’s sex, or (c) whether their child expresses a gender that differs with their child’s sex while at school.”

      So parents supporting child gender transition have the right to correct the school records.

      The Youngkin version attempts to make sure the parents make the decision. The Northam version permitted “school staff” to deny them the information on their child’s gender issues.

      Does that answer your concern?.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        No. There is this provision: “Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (4) of this section, [School Division] shall not compel [School Division] personnel or other students to address or refer to students in any manner that would violate their constitutionally protected rights.” So, a teacher can say that requiring him to refer to a transgender kid by a pronoun associated with the child’s biological sex violates that teachers First Amendment right of free speech.

        1. vicnicholls Avatar
          vicnicholls

          Nothing wrong with that. Good Lord Dick, people have to get over, yes, just get over and deal with it, if everyone doesn’t cave and slave in to a person who can’t handle that others may choose not to call them a name. My gosh, in my family I have several names that people call me that I don’t want to be called by (middle name, etc.) and you know what? I don’t whine to the Gov to change laws for it. I don’t call the cops on them. I don’t need a psych to deal with it. Holy cow. You wonder why folks have had enough of this crap, this is why. Deal with life. Not everyone on this planet is going to agree with everything nor are we required to be forced to do it: when it comes to something like this. A name. Nicknames.

          1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            If names don’t matter, why does the Governor put forth a policy that a child must be called by a name that he does not want unless he has a court order? Why can’t conservatives just “get over and deal with” the idea that some people do not identify with the gender to which they have been assigned?

          2. vicnicholls Avatar
            vicnicholls

            Why can’t progressives deal with not dictating women out of existance, how people spend their money, 2 tiered justice, whether people have a baby or not, whether people are vaccinated or not? My family calls me whatever and I deal with it, then you can have kids who can deal with being kids/minors under the law, and learn that their place is not to dictate to adults how to run a city, state or country. They’re kids because they do not have the mental ability (although some rarely do) to deal with life. The reason so many are so screwed up is the adults that aren’t acting like it and putting issues in front of them they are not capable mentally, physically or emotionally to deal with. When you are an adult, you can do adult stuff. The choices made, given the # of detransitions that are being hidden or trying to force the silence on, are not ones that respect individual rights, choices, and freedoms.

        2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          I don’t think a teacher will be permitted to call a child George when the school records say Nancy, do you?

          If someone did that, I would fire him or her for insubordination.

          1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            If Nancy does not want to be called George, yes, the teacher should be disciplined.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            It’s called “creating a hostile work environment”.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            but it’s their free speech “right” , right?

          4. Rosie Avatar
            Rosie

            The policy permits it, and quite literally says School Divisions cannot force school staff to comply.

          5. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            George Sand?

            If I call you Shylock, I’m being hostile. If you prefer I call you Shylock, and I continue to call you Sherlock…

        3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          Exactly and Youngkin is saying that those perceived rights of teachers overrule what he says is a fundamental right of parents.

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        No it doesn’t for exactly the reason Dick cited below. Read the entire Model Policy. Now answer me whose rights have primacy? Parents or teachers? Youngkin’s guidance says teacher’s rights overrule parents. Again, is that now the Conservative position?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          it depends…… 😉

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Yep, we all know that is the REAL message here. I like to see their attempts at gaslighting us though….

    5. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      You wrote: “Youngkin contends that parents have a fundamental right to raise their children as they deem best and that the “state” can not undermine that right”.

      See Code of Virginia § 1-240.1. Rights of parents.
      “A parent has a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parent’s child.”

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        So why then does Youngkin’s policy put the supposed 1st amendment rights of teachers over this fundamental right of parents? That is the question you are avoiding? Again, is it now the Conservative policy that teacher’s rights trump parental rights?

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          I am not, and neither is he. Both have a claim to rights. Courts will have to settle which rights take precedence if those are the facts of a case presented to them.

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            He most certainly does. Dick quoted the policy and the statement. Respect the rights of the parents unless they conflict with the rights of the teachers. Teachers are given veto power over how a trans child is addressed regardless of the parent’s wishes. I get Conservatives are good with the rights of parents of trans students being denied but it shows Youngkin and his ilk to be hypocritical liars.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            and… that policy is actually baldly fostering/condoning discriminatory behavior by claiming it’s “free speech” and in doing so creates a hostile environment for transgenders.

            This is who Conservatives seem to want to be these days. Claims of character and principles is a joke.

            Imagine such “free speech” in a sexual harassment incident or a racial one. “hey sweet cheeks” or ” Boy, are you listening to me”.

            “free speech”

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            and… that policy is actually baldly fostering/condoning discriminatory behavior by claiming it’s “free speech” and in doing so creates a hostile environment for transgenders.

            This is who Conservatives seem to want to be these days. Claims of character and principles is a joke.

            Imagine such “free speech” in a sexual harassment incident or a racial one. “hey sweet cheeks” or ” Boy, are you listening to me”.

            “free speech”

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            and… that policy is actually baldly fostering/condoning discriminatory behavior by claiming it’s “free speech” and in doing so creates a hostile environment for transgenders.

            This is who Conservatives seem to want to be these days. Claims of character and principles is a joke.

            Imagine such “free speech” in a sexual harassment incident or a racial one. “hey sweet cheeks” or ” Boy, are you listening to me”.

            “free speech”

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            and… that policy is actually baldly fostering/condoning discriminatory behavior by claiming it’s “free speech” and in doing so creates a hostile environment for transgenders.

            This is who Conservatives seem to want to be these days. Claims of character and principles is a joke.

            Imagine such “free speech” in a sexual harassment incident or a racial one. “hey sweet cheeks” or ” Boy, are you listening to me”.

            “free speech”

  6. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Seem to be portraying an each side “interpretation” argument but really fails to deal with facts and realities. They are not really “two” approaches.

    The “Northam model” seems to be the 4th Circuit Court “model”and the Youngkin model – something he made up.

    The “Youngkin model” seems to be rather some election/culture war thing he made up, not even sure if it is based on an AG opinion perhaps a “tell”.

    ” The Department is mindful of constitutional protections that prohibit governmental entities from requiring individuals to adhere to or adopt a particular ideological belief.”

    Is he claiming the 4th Circuit did this? They seemed to affirm the right of the govt to act on behalf of the transgender’s “rights”.

    “The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees religious freedom and prohibits the government from compelling speech that is contrary to an individual’s personal or religious beliefs.”

    “religious freedom” does not give one the right to deny another person rights based on their religious beliefs.

    Does the transgender have these rights and the govt the responsibility to protect them?

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d4df648ce85085b70466b7ce72a2f482a8b20551be81c984fdb4e87475e10209.jpg

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Folks should remember, this case was in 2021 after the current SCOTUS has been picked and seated.

      “Summary
      The U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari in the case of Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board on June 28, 2021. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said that they would have granted the petition. The denial leaves standing a Fourth Circuit ruling that interpreted Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause to prohibit discrimination against transgender students―a position that aligns with guidance from the Department of Education under the Biden Administration.

      The Upshot
      Schools in the Fourth Circuit—as well as the Seventh and 11th Circuits, which have issued similar rulings—must allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that align with their gender identities.
      Schools should continue to follow the new guidance by the Department of Education advising that Title IX prohibits LGBTQ+ discrimination.
      The Bottom Line
      Every appeals court that has considered the issue has ruled that transgender students must be allowed to use bathrooms that match their gender identities. The Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari leaves those decisions standing. Based on these decisions and guidance from the Biden Administration, the Department of Education, and the Department of Justice, schools should evaluate and adjust policies that do not respect the gender identities of transgender students. ”

      https://www.ballardspahr.com/insights/alerts-and-articles/2021/06/supreme-court-declines-cert-in-fourth-circuit-transgender-student-case

      1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
        James C. Sherlock

        The Supreme Court did not rule. It declined to take the case. It declines to take 99% of the cases petitioned to it.

        There are many reasons for denying certiorari, among them waiting for a case the facts of which the justices find offer an opportunity for a clear decision on a point of law on which they wish to rule.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Agree. But until then , the decision of the lower court stands, right?

          And I agree, this SCOTUS may well rule otherwise given their recent decision on abortion and their expressed sentiment on same sex marriage.

        2. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Gorsuch couched his opinion in terms of the text of the 1964 statute and its ban on discrimination because of sex.

          “It is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating … based on sex,” the justice wrote. He gave the example of two employees attracted to men — one male, the other female. “If the employer fires the male employee for no reason other than the fact that he is attracted to men,” but not the woman who is attracted to men, that is clearly a firing based on sex, he said.

          DoEd on Title IX
          “A recipient institution that receives Department funds must operate its education program or activity in a nondiscriminatory manner free of discrimination based on sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity. Some key issue areas in which recipients have Title IX obligations are: recruitment, admissions, and counseling; financial assistance; athletics; sex-based harassment, which encompasses sexual assault and other forms of sexual violence; treatment of pregnant and parenting students; treatment of LGBTQI+ students; discipline; single-sex education; and employment. Also, no recipient or other person may intimidate, threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by Title IX or its implementing regulations, or because the individual has made a report or complaint, testified, assisted, or participated or refused to participate in a proceeding under Title IX. For a recipient to retaliate in any way is considered a violation of Title IX. The Department’s Title IX regulations (Volume 34, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 106) provide additional information about the forms of discrimination prohibited by Title IX.”

          1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            Perhaps I am wrong, but you and the Biden Education department appear to conflate the failure to single out transgender kids for special treatment as discrimination.

            I disagree.

            The Supreme Court has found that sexual orientation and gender identity are protected classes under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII makes it “unlawful . . . for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual . . . because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”

            Perhaps the crux of the legal argument in this case is whether
            1. active discrimination is required for federal courts to act; or
            2. they can act based on the failure to single out a protected class for special treatment.

            The Youngkin administration is betting that the lack of active discrimination – a policy neutral to all classes – is good enough.

            Certainly if such a policy is judged to be a cover for discrimination, the state will lose, and should.

            But I hope the Youngkin administration policy is vindicated.

            The implications of a different result include endless class warfare in the courts – over everything.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Congress, being lazy, used the same wording in Title IX (EA72) as they did in Title VII (CRA64). It is illogical to interpet them differently. If the policy creates, or is conducive to, a hostile environment then, well, it’s all that’s needed.

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            If only certain sexes can be referred to by the state with certain nicknames, that is active discrimination based on sex….

          4. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            If only certain sexes can be referred to by the state with certain nicknames, that is active discrimination based on sex….

          5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Robert: “I want you to call me ‘Clyde’, please.
            Teacher: Ok
            Jane: “I want you to call me ‘Clyde’, please.
            Teacher: No, you are a woman.

            How is that not discrimination based on sex?

          6. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Patrick: “Please, just call me ‘Pat’.”
            Teacher: “Okay.”
            Patricia: “Please, just call me ‘Pat’.”
            Teacher: “No. To me, ‘Pat’ is a boy’s nickname. I’ll call you ‘Patty’.”

          7. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            That’s exactly on the mark.

  7. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    So, I can predict confusion and consternation already. The model policy requires teachers and school personnel “refer to a student by a name other than one in the student’s official record, or by pronouns other than those appropriate to the sex appearing in the student’s official record, only if an eligible student or a student’s parent has instructed [School Division] in writing that such other name or other pronouns be used because of the student’s persistent and sincere belief that the student’s gender differs from his or her sex. (Emphasis added)

    Therefore, if a student’s name in his official record is “William” but he has been known as, and gone by, “Bill” all his life, teachers and school personnel are forbidden to refer to him as “Bill” unless his parents have notified the school in writing that he should be called “Bill” because of his “persistent and sincere belief ” that his gender differs from his sex, although that is not the case; he just prefers “Bill”. The situation would be even more compelling in those cases in which students hate their given names and wish to go by nicknames. (I once had a friend who was saddled with an old family name: Ethelbert. Naturally, he went by “Bert”. Under Youngkin’s policy, I can hear the snickers every time a teacher called on “Ethelbert”.)

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      I think this item covers your scenario, Dick:

      “2. [School Division] personnel shall refer to each student using only (i) the name that appears in the student’s official record, or (ii) if the student prefers, using any nickname commonly associated with the name that appears in the student’s official record.”

      Your point though is solid. By trying to micromanage how students can be addressed in school, they open themselves up to significant conflict for the unexpected scenario. This is what happens when a politician comes into power by running on a platform of “you can’t trust teachers but you can trust politicians”. Really pitiful, imo.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        often and usually, policy is based on law instead of autocratic decree which seems to be the way that Conservatives wish to roll these days.

      2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        Thanks, I overlooked that provision. But, who gets to decide what “nickname” is “commonly associated with the name that appears in the student’s official record”? I went to high school with a girl whose name was “Lavinia” who was known as “Bebo”. In her pictures in the school yearbook, she is identified as Bebo. I am not sure of any nickname “commonly associated” with Lavinia, but I seriously doubt if “Bebo” would be one. Then there was a girl with the names “Barbara Blair”, who went by the nickname, “Cherry”. As for boys, there was a “William Allen”, commonly known as “Butch”;

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          So it all boils down to the use of nicknames. Who knew?

          1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            No, that is not what it boils down to, but it is one of those unintended consequences of policy put together to satisfy a certain constituency.

            And it could result in discrimination. If “Mary” decides “they” want to be called “Butch”, but the school refuses to allow it, but allows “William Allen” to go by “Butch”, it seems that “Mary’s” equal protection rights (that 14th Amendment that the administration invokes) would be violated.

          2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            So, would it be better for trans students to have no state policy at all or to have the Youngkin one?

            The Northam “model policies” have been repealed.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            by who? not the courts, not the GA.

          4. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            Government 101. Legislatures write laws. Executives write policies.

            The law on this issue is very general, and directs the executive to write policy.

            When Northam was the chief executive, his DOE wrote Model Policies. The law did not say “Gov. Northam’s DOE will write model policies, and they can never be changed”

            Now that Youngkin is governor, his DOE wrote another, differing set.

            Right up front, the Youngkin Model Policies proclaim “the Department hereby withdraws the 2021 Model Policies, which shall have no further force and effect.”

            As I write all the time, elections have consequences.

          5. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            I agree that the legislation is general enough and the administration can replace the Northam policy with its own. That policy has its inconsistencies, as has been pointed out in these comments.

          6. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Oh I totally agree. I just thought though most policies did reference underlying laws.

          7. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            Both model policies reference the Virginia law that directs the VDOE to write policy. Both referenced multiple related laws.

            Except the Northam policy neglected to reference the Virginia law codifying parental rights. It did not fit what they wanted to do.

          8. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Your military training has not gone to waste, or unnoticed.

          9. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Your military training has not gone to waste, or unnoticed.

          10. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
            Dick Hall-Sizemore

            It would probably would be better to have no policy and leave it to local school boards.

          11. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            A decent solution.

            But by a law passed during the Democratic interregnum, the DOE was directed to write policy on this issue.

            You and I believe that GA thought when writing it that there would never be another Republican governor of Virginia. They were wrong.

          12. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            He could write a broader policy and leave much up to the discretion of the local schools or school boards. Of course that doesn’t jive with his “teachers can’t be trusted” political message does it…?

        2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          It is inevitable that they find themselves in this position since they must maintain the premise that teachers are not to be trusted.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      I think this item covers your scenario, Dick:

      “2. [School Division] personnel shall refer to each student using only (i) the name that appears in the student’s official record, or (ii) if the student prefers, using any nickname commonly associated with the name that appears in the student’s official record.”

      Your point though is solid. By trying to micromanage how students can be addressed in school, they open themselves up to significant conflict for the unexpected scenario. This is what happens when a politician comes into power by running on a platform of “you can’t trust teachers but you can trust politicians”. Really pitiful, imo.

    3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      I think this item covers your scenario, Dick:

      “2. [School Division] personnel shall refer to each student using only (i) the name that appears in the student’s official record, or (ii) if the student prefers, using any nickname commonly associated with the name that appears in the student’s official record.”

      Your point though is solid. By trying to micromanage how students can be addressed in school, they open themselves up to significant conflict for the unexpected scenario. This is what happens when a politician comes into power by running on a platform of “you can’t trust teachers but you can trust politicians”. Really pitiful, imo.

    4. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Comradery or camaraderie, if you prefer…

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D7n9YX1Xfw4

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    While we’re at it, Glenn, how about you declare that Rick or Rich are the official nicknames for Richard, thus freeing Dick as a nickname for Governor of Virginia?

  9. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    As an aside: would they please drop the old broad in the ground! What is THIS country’s obsession with THAT country’s royal family?! I blame Disney.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      blasphemy!

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Yeah, it is, and I shouldn’t take Walt’s name in vain.

  10. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Explicit preferences or we can all just wing it…

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TYkjXMpKBBQ

  11. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Scenario: Two employees, Mr. Smith and Ms. Jones.
    “Ms. Jones, would you hand me that report?”
    “It’s Mr. Jones. I’m a transgender.”
    “Ms. Jones, I am not going to call you Mr. Jones. Your employee record indicate that when you were hired, your sex was “F”.
    “I would prefer Mr. Jones.”
    “Tough $#!^”

    There isn’t a workplace in America that would allow Mr. Smith to expose it to the liability of a sexual harassment lawsuit.
    “Mr. Smith, I’m only your teacher’s aide, but can we not have this discussion in front of the students?”

    But it’s okay to treat the customers thusly?

    1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
      James Wyatt Whitehead

      Billy Paul had something to say about Mrs. Jones.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKEItVNlYXI

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Not clear from the lyrics as to if there is also a workplace relationship, but “Never get yo’ honey where you get yo’ money.”

  12. James C. Sherlock Avatar
    James C. Sherlock

    Interesting conversation, as I meant it to be. I hope Democrats take their underlying position that parents have no rights when their children are in school to every election for the next decade. I really do.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      If that were actually true and you know it’s not and in fact a lie perpetrated by people who lack decency and character and want the power to dictate their own beliefs and a cynicism that people and parents won’t understand the nuances of the issues, They will and the end result will be what has happened to Conservatives on such issues in the past.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      Man, do you have an honest bone in your body? Where has anyone taken any position that said parents have no rights when their children are in school? Kind of unbelievable that you can even face yourself in the mirror at this point…

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        And he has the nerve of asking some to not comment on his shameless commentary!

Leave a Reply

Read More