A federal district court in Southern California ruled that a first-grader at Viejo Elementary School in Mission Viejo is not protected by the First Amendment after the child innocently gave an "offensive" drawing to a classmate "of color."
The incident stems from the Black Lives Matter (BLM) psy-op which saw essentially the entire country shift its educational format overnight to elevate dark-skinned people above light-skinned people. In this case, a young student at Viejo Elementary tried to support her black classmate following an indoctrination session about the superiority of black lives, only to be punished by her teachers and administrators for supporting her in the "wrong" way.
The child reportedly felt bad for her classmate "of color" after their teacher taught them about Martin Luther King Jr. and the BLM movement in a lesson. The child proceeded to draw a picture with the phrase "Black Lives Mater" [sic] written at the top, followed by the words "any life" and a picture of four circles of different colors, which were supposed to represent the child and three of her different-colored classmates holding hands.
The sweetly drawn picture was happily received by the black classmate whom it was intended for as a show of love, but after taking the drawing home the black classmate's mother became triggered by the drawing. The mother proceeded to call the school's principal, Jesus Becerra, "to express concern that her daughter was being singled out for her race."
Upon evaluation, Becerra determined that the words "any life" below "Black Lives Mater" were offensive because they imply that all lives matter, this being a highly "offensive" term that riles up leftists because they apparently believe that only black lives matter.
In a statement, Becerra said that the child's use of the term "any life" in her drawing is "inconsistent with values taught in the school." In other words, Viejo Elementary School in Mission Viejo does not believe that all lives matter, only black lives.
(Related: Last summer, we reported that a federal judge blocked California's Wuhan coronavirus [COVID-19] misinformation law in the case of Hoeg v. Newsom.)
Children's innocence destroyed to elevate Black lives over everyone else
To avoid going completely beyond the pale, Becerra, who in 2022 collected $207,678.20 in total pay and benefits from the Capistrano Unified School District, admitted that the child's drawing and the motives behind it were "innocent." Still, he proceeded to declare the drawing "racist" and "inappropriate" before proceeding to punish the child, "who loved to draw."
Both the child who drew the picture and the child who received it were confused upon being confronted about the matter. Their innocence is color blind, after all, which cannot be said for the recipient child's mother, Becerra, or the rest of the "adults" who proceeded to destroy these children's innocence to push a deranged, anti-white political agenda.
The child who drew the picture was told that she could no longer draw and give pictures to her classmates. Teachers also banned the child from recess for two full weeks without telling her why, and without telling her parents.
The child's parents eventually found out about the punishment roughly a year after the incident, prompting them to press the school for answers. Since the school was uncooperative, the child's parents sued the school, only to have a local judge rule in favor of Becerra and against the child, arguing that Becerra was operating under qualified immunity against the drawing author's First Amendment and retaliation claims.
The case is being appealed by the Pacific Legal Foundation and will soon, probably within the next year, be heard and decided by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Free speech is a fundamental pillar of American society. Learn more at FirstAmendment.news.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.