The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Toronto School Board Refused to Promote Event with Nobel-Winning Critic of ISIS
A school board official told said "students would not participate in a book-club event scheduled for February with Nadia Murad, a Nobel Prize-winner and activist," because "Ms. Murad’s book, 'The Last Girl: My Story of Captivity, and My Fight Against the Islamic State,' would foster Islamophobia."
The school board had also done the same as to a book club event that featured Marie Heinein, a defense lawyer in a prominent Canadian sexual assault trial. "Tanya Lee, who has organized the book club for about four years, said she … was told the school board's equity department felt the lawyer would send the wrong message." From the Toronto Globe & Mail (Caroline Alphonso):
A Room of Your Own Book Club invites teenage girls, many of whom come from low-income families, to read a text and then discuss it in a virtual space with the author. School principals and teachers promote the events to their students….
Tanya Lee, who has organized the book club for about four years, said she was told in late October by the school board superintendent she deals with that TDSB schools would not promote this month's event with Ms. Henein. Ms. Lee said she was told the school board's equity department felt the lawyer would send the wrong message.
"They told me straight out 'no' because [Ms. Henein] defended Jian Ghomeshi and how do you explain that to little girls," Ms. Lee said.
Ms. Henein, who became nationally prominent when she represented Mr. Ghomeshi, a former CBC broadcaster, at his 2016 sexual-assault trial, wrote Nothing But the Truth: A Memoir….
When asked about this, a school board spokesman stated that "there appears to have been a misunderstanding, as the equity department does not review and approve books for book clubs"; according to the Globe & Mail, the spokesman "said in an e-mail … that both books are being reviewed by board staff, as is standard practice for books being distributed to students in TDSB schools, 'and we hope to be in a position to approve in the near future.'"
It seems to me that public schools (and of course private schools) are generally free to choose which book club invitations to pass along to their students, including based on the viewpoints that the books express. That would be the general view under American First Amendment law (unless the school has deliberately set up a limited public forum in which it has decided to pass along such outside invitations indiscriminately, which few schools are likely to want to do).
The problem is with the school official's particular choices: (1) The decision that talking about ISIS's atrocities is somehow not "equitable, culturally relevant and responsive" because ISIS is an extremist Islamic group, and (2) the judgment that you can't "explain … to little girls" that defendants—including ones accused of sex crimes—are entitled to a lawyer, and are presumed innocent until proven guilty (Ghomeshi wasn't proved guilty, but that's largely beside the point). When a school official makes those choices, something is deeply wrong, and I hope the school board ultimately does reverse that decision.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Let’s Go Justin
Let's go Justin
"there appears to have been a misunderstanding, as the equity department does not review and approve books for book clubs"
They have denied that the equity board is part of the normal book review process. They have not denied that the equity board was involved in _this_ author's blacklisting. If they wanted to deny involvement they would say, "the equity board and its members had no influence on this decision."
Reminds me of Ronald Sullivan's being punished by Harvard for joining Harvey Weinstein's defense team.
They've actually just avoided the question entirely. Nobody is contending that the equity department reviews or approves books for book clubs. They're contending that the equity department pulled marketing and advertisement based on the book chosen for by book club.
The equity department doesn't interfere with the topics of events. It just interferes with the ability of anyone to know about events that focus on the wrong topic. See, entirely different and okay!
"... Ronald Sullivan's being punished by Harvard for joining Harvey Weinstein's defense team ..."
Even Harvey Weinstein, who I feel ought to be lashed to a casting couch and burnt alive in the town square, is entitled to the fairest representation possible, just because someone really really hated deserves really really fair competent representation, just because I hate Weinstein and would like to see him burn on a casting couch in the town square screaming for the mercy he did not show.
More than snow pure defendants, the reviled and hated Weinsteins deserve a fair representation in court.
Normally I would air on the side of permissiveness with respect to freedom of speech but in this instance, I believe the school board is correct. ISIS is an extremist organization but its deplorable views do not truly represent the peaceful, humanitarian vision espoused by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the Koran. This is not to say that we shouldn't collectively blame white Canadians for historical acts of colonial oppression by cishet patriarchal Christian chauvinistic settlers from Britain and France.
Excellent parody.
Wow -- I hadn't seen you in months and just mentioned you yesterday. Sorta like a kosher Beetlejuice.
Canada’s progressivism leads to inehquality of rights.
I have no argument with the proposition that "progressivism" leads to inequality of rights (unequal treatment under the law), but I am not sure I see how this is an example of that. Maybe you could elaborate.
“Extremist”…that reminds me when President Obama would wag his fingers at brown foreigners and Amerisplain to them that they didn’t know yo how to practice their religion properly. Americans, that think nothing of spending trillions of dollars slaughtering Muslims, are the best people to Amerisplain to them how to worship Allah properly. Now let Muhammad marry Muhammad and join modernity after an American president won an election in this century running on the platform of slaughtering Muslims on the other side of the world and making sure marriage remained between one man with one pee pee and one woman with one wee wee. 😉
Little girls, there was someone who thought a certain person had done bad things to people. Ms. Henein explained to people that that person had not done those bad things.
Remember Obama administration's "guidance" to colleges & universities? It would appear that, for "progressives," once you're accused of sexual assault, that's the end of it -- you don't get to "explain that you haven't done those bad things."
One issue here in Canada is that the Supreme Court has held (in McKinney v University of Guelph, 1990 CanLII 60 (SCC)) that public universities are not, for the purpose of freedom of expression under the Charter of Rights, like other parts of the government. The protection afforded freedom of expression in universities is therefore less than in the United States. I don't know whether this extends to primary and secondary schools, but it may well.
Many thanks for this comment. Eugene's post was frustrating in that it doesn't tell us what Canadian law has to say about this, presumably because he doesn't know. Like most Americans, I'm pretty ignorant about Canadian law. Any other insights you could provide would be appreciated.
"A school board spokesman later told the hat"
Hat speech?
Don't know that came out, fixed it, thanks!
Hats are just brimming with things to say. The top hat will cap things off.
The Equity Department seems very much to be talking through its hat…
I would have said they are talking out of their posterior exhaust port. 🙂
And here I was trying to refrain from an “asshat” reference. ….
The link seems to be about the defense lawyer - here's the story about the former slave:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10247301/School-CANCELS-event-ISIS-survivor-Nadia-Murad-saying-visit-offensive-Muslims.html
As for the lawyer, I can see why they wouldn't want to promote just one side of a criminal case, with an attorney who is duty-bound to put their client's case in as good a light as reasonably possible.
But as for the former slave, by all means introduce the pupils to some of the horrors of the world - I don't see a need to balance out the antislavery account with a proslavery speaker.
And their concern is that Muslim students would feel attacked, a concern which I imagine could be alleviated by having, say, a local imam join the woman on stage to explain how un-Islamic her treatment was.
The pro-slavery faction didn’t want to speak, they wanted to prevent the other side from doing so.
My second grade teacher taught some of the horrors of the world, death and mistreatment of civilians in some conflict in Africa. He didn't come back the next year. (Yes, a male elementary school teacher!)
The trial was in 2016.
Nah, this is a doubly bad call - who you defend as an attorney is not what your point of view is, and ISIS is not Islam, nor does studying it promote Islamophobia except in those who are already deep into that deal.
The school boatd’s clarifying statements appear completely reconcilable with its actions. The school board doesn’t approve the selectiin of books by the independent book club, merely whether the school district will promote their events or not. And it may well be intending to approve promotions of book club events in the near future, although perhaps not the present one.
This doesn't seem to reference the more recent attack on free speech by the TDSB: the cancellation of a talk by Nobel Peace Prize winner Nadia Murad. From the Fox News story:
A woman who lived through kidnapping and sexual slavery at the hands of ISIS had an event cancelled by a Canadian school board due to fears of "Islamophobia."
Twenty-eight-year-old Nadia Murad was scheduled to visit with students from 600 different schools to speak about her upcoming book, "The Last Girl: My Story Of Captivity," which documents the horrific treatment she suffered from ISIS but was told by the Toronto School District that her event could not be held because it could "foster Islamophobia", according to the Telegraph.
And here's the really interesting part: this story has not been covered by even one major news outlet in Canada. Not the CBC, CTV, Global, the Globe and Mail or anywhere other than a couple local news stations in Toronto. And as one friend who lives in Toronto said, from the coverage given to this, you'd think the school board had accidentally invited some raging islamophobe. You would think refusing to let a woman who won the Nobel Peace Prize speak would be newsworthy.
How odd -- I had included the material on Murad in the subtitle, to match the reference in the title, but it somehow got lost as I was posting it (there was a technical glitch with the posting, and I thought that was resolved, but apparently it wasn't). I've added it back.
Just to make clear, though, the Globe and Mail did indeed cover the story; that's where I'm quoting from.
“Little girls”.
But the article says teenage girls.
No better age for girls to learn there are many shades of gray to a relationship, and that merely making an accusation isn’t the end of the matter.
That’s useful information at the beginning, middle, and especially the end of a lot of relationships, at any age.
It also seems to me that by deciding criticism of ISIS, and trying to suppress knowledge of which ISIS was all about the school district was making a judgment that ISIS represents mainstream Muslim thought and practices therefore offended all or most Muslims.
That would be like banning criticism of Fred Phelps “God Hates Fags” sect as anti-Christian bigotry offensive to all Christians.
That's my general thought on the matter: They actually DO think ISIS is representative of mainstream Islam, and so view attacks on the terrorist group as attacks on Islam.
Or, maybe, they think the average person is utterly incapable of encompassing an idea as subtle as, "Some Muslims are terrorists, but not all of them.", and so think they have to suppress any discussion of Islamic terrorism lest average people start firebombing mosques.
Of course, the truth is actually somewhere between "All Islam is terrorist!" and "Terrorism has nothing to do with Islam!", but 'multiculturalism' forbids acknowledging that.
Multiculuralism just says making broad statements about Islam generally is about as pinched as doing the same about Christianity.
Actually, that's not even multiculturalism, it's just common sense.
Multiculturalism in theory, vs multiculturalism in practice.
In theory, multiculturalism just says that you shouldn't generalize beyond the data. As you say, common sense.
In practice, multiculturalism essentially forbids noticing that any culture besides Western culture has any bad aspects. It largely reduces cultures to quaint folkways and ethnic cooking, and turns a deliberately blind eye to the real world consequences of culture, the fact that some cultures promote human welfare, and some don't.
The same day the referenced article appeared in the Globe and Mail the Toronto District School Board published a statement from its Director of Education:
It seems a board member spoke out of turn. How like the leftist press to blow it all out of proportion!
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
I think, once you've abandoned support for due process (for ALL defendants), you've surrendered any claim to being a liberal.
compare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promising_Young_Woman
The movie promotes the idea that if you don't get (what you believe to be) justice from the legal system, you can effect your own "justice."
It's worthy of note that the "heroine" of the movie goes after not only the accused rapist, but also his lawyer.
The movie got an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.
So, we should blame Canada after all!
I thought so...