Quote:
DeSantis Signs a Controversial Measure
Depending on who you ask, Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law on Monday a bill that either protects 5-year-old children from “sexualization” and “grooming” or prevents them from acknowledging the existence of their loved ones. It either stops insidious “indoctrination” in its tracks, or imposes a “dangerous” new censorship regime in the Sunshine State. But as is often the case, reality is far more nuanced—and far less hyperbolic—than partisan narratives would lead you to believe.
We’ve thus far held off on covering House Bill 1557—the Parental Rights in Education Act if you support it, the “Don’t Say Gay” Bill if you don’t—both because key details of the legislation were still in flux and because DeSantis’ signature was not guaranteed. But with the statutory language finalized and the provisions now set to go into effect on July 1, it’s worth taking a closer look at one of the most controversial—and mischaracterized—laws of 2022.
GOP State Rep. Joe Harding introduced the measure in early January, arguing it was necessary to address Floridians’ concerns about what is being taught in public schools and provide parents with an opportunity to take a more active role in their children’s education. “This bill is about defending the most awesome responsibility a person can have: being a parent,” he said. “That job can only be given to you by above.”
How did he go about doing that? The initial draft of his legislation would require schools to notify parents of any changes to the “services or monitoring” related to their child’s “mental, emotional, or physical health,” and prohibit districts from adopting procedures that encourage students to withhold such information from their parents. It would also forbid school districts from “encourag[ing] classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.” If a parent believes a teacher violated this statute and their concern is not “resolved” by the school district, they could sue the relevant school district for injunctive relief, damages, and attorney fees. (“This is going to be a lawsuit factory,” Gabriel Malor—an appellate litigator based in Virginia—told The Dispatch. “This is going to be great for trial lawyers in Florida.”)
It was the “classroom discussion” clause that earned the proposal its “Don’t Say Gay” moniker from progressive opponents as it worked its way through the Florida legislature in late February and early March, passing the House 69-47 and the Senate 22-17. “This bill, from its introduction, has been used as a vehicle to marginalize and attack LGTBQ people,” State Rep. Carlos Smith—a Florida Democrat—argued earlier this month. “[It] sends a terrible message to our youth that there is something wrong with LGBTQ people, that there is something so dangerous or inappropriate about us that we have to be prohibited and censored from the classroom.”
During the legislative process, the bill was amended to swap out “classroom discussion” for “classroom instruction,” a tweak that ostensibly would leave more room for students to ask questions or introduce conversations on their own. “That’s a bit of an important distinction between the two [versions],” Malor said. “Classroom instruction, of course, has a much more structural connotation, a from-the-teacher-to-students-type situation, rather than students simply raising something in class and, does the teacher have to cut them off or not?”
https://morning.thedispatch.com/p/the-m ... 4NpRTo&s=r
18 Mar 2022, 9:29 pm
