Florida school bans Amanda Gorman poem over one parent’s CRT fears

JUST TWO WEEKS AFTER JANUARY JUST TWO WEEKS AFTER JANUARY 6TH, AN INCREDIBLY POIGNANT AND POWERFUL MOMENT. 22-YEAR-OLD AMANDA — ‘S TOOK ABOUT PRESIDENT BIDEN’S INAUGURATION AND READ WHATEVER POEMS. >> WE WILL NOT BE TURNED AROUND OR INTERRUPTED BY INTIMIDATION. BECAUSE WE KNOW OUR INACTION AND INERTIA WILL BE THE INHERITANCE OF THE NEXT GENERATION, OUR BLENDERS BECOME THEIR BURDENS. BUT ONE THING IS CERTAIN. IF WE WE MERGE MERCY WITH MIGHT, AND MIGHT WITH RIGHT, THEN LOVE BECOMES OUR LEGACY. AND CHANGE OUR CHILDREN’S BIRTH RIGHT. >> THAT PALM, THE HILL WE CLIMB, IS NOW BANNED FOR ELEMENTARY

CLASSES AT A SCHOOL IN MIAMI, DADE. AFTER ONE PARENT, JUST A SINGLE PARENT COMPLAINT THE POEM WAS NOT EDUCATIONAL, AND HAD, I QUOTE DIRECTLY, INDIRECTLY — INDIRECTLY HATE MESSAGES. THAT’S THE PURPOSE WAS TO CAUSE CONFUSION AND INDOCTRINATED AND. THAT ONE COMPLAINT WAS ENOUGH FOR THE SCHOOL TO BAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL KIDS FROM EATING THAT POLL. BY THE FIRST EVER NATIONAL YOUTH POET LAUREATE, AND THE YOUNGEST EVER INAUGURAL POET. THAT WAS MADE POSSIBLE BY WOMEN. AND HIS FACILITATORS IN THE LEGISLATURE, FLORIDA GOVERNOR RON DESANTIS. TONIGHT, AMANDA GORMAN HAS RESPONDED TO THE BAND SAYING, QUOTE, I AM GUTTED.

I WROTE THE HILL WE CLIMB SO THAT ALL YOUNG PEOPLE COULD SEE THEMSELVES IN THE HISTORICAL MOMENT. ROBIN CHILDREN OF THE CHANCE TO FIND THEIR VOICES IN

LITERATURE IS A VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO FREE THOUGHT AND FREE SPEECH. SHE ALSO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO SPEAK OUT, POINTING TO A LAWSUIT HER PUBLISHERS JOINED ALONG WITH P.E.N. AMERICA AND OTHERS AGAINST ANOTHER FLORIDA SCHOOL DISTRICT, IN SCANDIA COUNTY THAT’S BANNED BOOKS. I’M JOINED NOW BY SUZANNE NOSSEL SHE’S THE CEO OF PAN AMERICA, — WHO HAS TWO CHILDREN IN THAT DISTRICT AND IS ALSO PLAINTIFF IN THE SUIT. GOOD

HAVE YOU BOTH HERE. LET ME START WITH YOU IN TERMS OF LEVEL SETTING ON THESE BOOKENDS, AND WHETHER. HAPPENING IN FLORIDA. THERE’S A LITTLE BIT OF AMBIGUITY HERE, THEY PASS A LAW THAT ESSENTIALLY ROUTINIZES — BUT THEN THE STATE DOESN’T HAVE TO TAKE CREDIT FOR IT HAPPENING? HOW DOES IT ACTUALLY HAPPEN, WHAT’S THE CONTESTATION IN YOUR LAWSUIT? >> SURE, THERE ARE TWO FLAWS IN LAWYER WHAT WE CALL THE DON’T SAY GAY LAW, THE LAW THAT PROHIBITS DISCUSSION OF LGBTQ TOPICS IN SCHOOLS AND THEN A LAW THAT DOES SIMILARLY, WHEN IT COMES TO DISCUSSIONS ABOUT RACE

THAT ARE CONTENTIOUS, THAT COULD MAKE SOMEBODY FEEL PERHAPS GUILTY ABOUT THE RACE. AND WHAT THOSE TWO LAWS HAVE DONE IS CREATE AN ENABLING ENVIRONMENT FOR BOOK BANNING. IN MANY DISTRICTS, AS YOU SAY, IT TAKES ONLY A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL, DOES NOT NECESSARILY EVEN HAVE TO BE APPARENT TO LODGE AN OBJECTION, AND FOR THAT OBJECTION IS A LAW IS ILLUSTRATIVE IN THE BOOK. A FEW LINES SCRIBBLED, OUT THE PERSON HASN’T READ THE PALM. THEY DON’T GIVE ANY DETAIL. THAT IS ENOUGH TO GET A BOOK PULLED FROM THE SHELVES FOR A REVIEW PROCESS THAT CAN GO ON FOR

MONTHS AND MONTHS, THE NINE KIDS THE BOOK IN ESCAMBIA, IT’S PRETTY EGREGIOUS. THERE IS A REVIEW PANEL PANEL, EDUCATORS, AND LIBRARIAN TO LOOK AT THESE BOOKS. BUT TIME AND AGAIN, SCHOOL BOARDS OVERWRITE THEM. THEY DECIDE THESE BOOKS HAVE, WHERE THERE’S VALUE, HERE THE KIDS COULD HAVE. THE SCHOOL BOARD SAYS NO, THESE ARE CONTENTIOUS, WE THINK WE CAN SCORE POLITICAL OR IDEOLOGICAL POINTS BY RISKING THESE BOOKS AWAY, THAT’S WHAT THEY’VE DONE. >> YOU’RE LINDSEY, YOU’RE A PARENT IN ESCAMBIA COUNTY, WHY DID YOU CHOOSE TO DO IN THIS LAWSUIT? >> WELL, CHRIS, RESTRICTED ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND

VIEWPOINT CENSORSHIP VIOLATES OUR STUDENTS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. I THINK THERE ARE SO MANY TEACHERS AND PARENTS THAT YOU DON’T FEEL SAFE SPEAKING UP AGAINST IT. I THOUGHT WAS TIME THAT I SAY SOMETHING. >> HAVE YOU HAD EXPERIENCED FIRSTHAND IN TERMS OF YOUR KIDS SCHOOLS OR IN TERMS OF OTHER PARENTS LODGING COMPLAINTS FOR BOOKS? HAS THIS ENERGIZED WHAT SEEMS TO BE A RELATIVELY SMALL GROUP OF OBSESSIVE’S, WHO HAVE FILED COMPLAINTS ABOUT BOOKS? HAVE YOU SEEN THIS FIRSTHAND AND ESCAMBIA COUNTY, WHERE YOUR KIDS GO TO SCHOOL? >> 100%. YES. PRIMARILY AT SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS AND MOMENT WE’RE

TALKING ABOUT THE BOOKS THAT THESE COMMITTEES HAVE — LIKE SUZANNE SAID. >> SUSAN, WHAT IS THE CONTENTION. LINDSAY JUST SAID THIS ABOUT HER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, WHAT’S THE SUBSTANCE OF THE LAWSUIT. >> IT’S TWOFOLD, FIRST AMENDMENT AND 14TH AMENDMENT, THE FIRST AMENDMENT ASPECT IS THAT, WHAT THESE DISTRICTS ARE DOING, WHAT A SCAM IS DOING, IS PICKING HIS CHOOSING ON IDEOLOGICAL GROUNDS, WHICH BOOKS ARE GOING TO BE TAKEN OFF SHELVES. THAT’S VIEWPOINT BASED DISCRIMINATION, IT STRIKES RIGHT AT THE HEART OF WHAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS AGAINST. AND BARR’S GOVERNMENT FROM DOING. SO, THAT’S PIECE ONE. THE

SECOND PIECE, 14 AMENDMENT, OVERWHELMINGLY, THE TARGET OF BOOKS, BOOKS BY AUTHORS OF COLOR, LGBTQ NARRATIVES, AND SO, IT’S QUITE CLEAR THAT A DISCRIMINATORY PURPOSE. THEY’RE TRYING TO ERADICATE CERTAIN STORIES, CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS, FROM THE CURRICULUM. THAT’S DISCRIMINATORY. THAT VIOLATES KIDS RIGHT TO AN EQUAL EDUCATION. SO, WE’RE BRINGING BOTH CLAIMS AND TRYING TO VINDICATE BOTH SETS OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. >> LINDSEY, THERE’S THIS AMAZING WASHINGTON POST REPORTING, THIS WAS LOOKING AT 30,000 FEET FROM NATIONALLY, AN ANALYSIS OF BOTH CHALLENGES FROM ACROSS THE NATION SHOWS THE MAJORITY ARE FILED BY, AND THIS IS NOT A TYPO, JUST 11 PEOPLE.

THERE’S PEOPLE THAT ARE REALLY, REALLY INTO THIS. I DO WONDER, THE PERCEPTION WE END UP HAVING, LIKE DESANTIS DID THIS, BUT HE WON A RESOUNDING REELECTION, HE’S POPULAR IN FLORIDA. THIS IS WHAT PARENTS WANT. I’M JUST CURIOUS, TO THE EXTENT THERE’S CONVERSATION AROUND THE SOCCER FIELD, OR PGA, WHAT YOUR SENSE OF THE POPULARITY OR UNPOPULARITY OF THIS IS? UNPOPULARITY OF THIS IS? >> SO, I’VE GOT NOTHING BUT POSITIVE FEEDBACK FROM OUR COMMUNITY. SURPRISINGLY, I’VE NOT GOTTEN A LOT OF NEGATIVE FEEDBACK, AT ALL. BUT I THINK THAT OUR DISTRICT POLICY MANUAL CLEARLY SAYS THAT IT’S OUR

SCHOOLS RESPONSIBILITY, OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS RESPONSIBILITY, TO PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE COLLECTION OF BOOKS. THAT FOSTER RESPECT FOR DIVERSITY, AND CULTURAL APPRECIATION, AND SO, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT’S NOT GOING TO RESONATE WITH EVERYONE. IT DOES RESONATE WITH MOST PEOPLE. >> LINDSEY, I’M A PARENT OF THREE SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN MYSELF. I SEE PEOPLE MAKE THIS ARGUMENT, PARENTS SHOULD BE THE WANT TO DECIDE WHAT’S IN THE KIDS LIBRARY. WHAT, YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH A LIST OF 200 BOOKS? I CAN’T DO THAT. WHAT, EVERY PARENT IN THE SCHOOL? DO YOU THINK IT’S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE ONE

PARENT TO EXERCISE VETO POWER OVER BOOKS IN SCHOOLS? >> WELL, OF COURSE NOT. TO QUOTE — THERE’S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH A PAIR A CERTAIN A BOOK RIGHT FOR THEIR CHILD. A COLOSSAL PROBLEM WITH APPARENT DECIDING, THEREFORE, NO CHILD TO BUILD A READ THAT BOOK. >> THIS HAS BEEN FILED IN FEDERAL COURT. >> THAT’S RIGHT. >> THERE IS, IT SEEMS, THE LEGAL ASPECT OF THE CULTURAL ASPECT, WHICH YOU ARE UNIQUELY SITUATED. ARE WE IN THE GRIPS OF A PANIC, OH IN THE GRIPS OF A PANIC ABOUT THE PANIC, ARE THERE A LOT OF BOOKS BEING

BANNED, IT DOES SEEM LIKE THE NUMBERS BEAR THIS OUT. WHAT IS YOUR SENSE OF WHERE WE ARE, CULTURALLY, IN TERMS OF THIS KIND OF CENSORIOUS NEST THAT WE’RE SEEING. >> LOOK, I THINK LINDSAY’S RIGHT. THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF AMERICANS DON’T LIKE BOOK BANS. IT RUNS COUNTER TO OUR BASIC NOTIONS OF OUR FREEDOM TO SPEAK, FREEDOM TO READ, SO, IT’S A QUESTION OF MOBILIZING PEOPLE. THERE’S AN EFFORT HERE TO PLAY TO A VERY PARTICULAR CONSTITUENCY. >> 11 PEOPLE. >> 11 RIGHTEOUS BOOK MANNER. >> YEAH, THERE’S AN ELECTION, ON THE HORIZON. I THINK THERE’S A NOTION THAT

CERTAIN PEOPLE CAN GET ENERGIZED MOTIVATED BY THIS. THEY’RE GONNA PLAY TO THAT SEGMENT, AND RILE THEM UP. AND IT’S UP TO US TO MOBILIZE THE REST. THE MAJORITY. THIS IS ABOUT PARENTS RIGHTS INDEED, IT’S NOT THE RIGHTS OF THOSE 11 PARENTS, IT’S THE