Thread by @JeffreyASachs

This is a good thread, one that reveals once again how frequently proponents of these bills (in this case, Rufo) fail to understand the details of these bills. But the details matter!

In truth, it's actually worse than that.

https://twitter.com/FreeBlckThought/status/1494836127294898180

The issue here is whether these bills "merely" prohibit educator speech based on the speech's content versus the feelings or sentiments that speech has on students. The Florida bills is pernicious because it seems, in its discussion of "discomfort", to do the latter.

In fact, MANY of the bills would prohibit speech based on the feelings or sentiments that speech generates in students. That's because a huge number prohibit inclusion of any curricular material that does the following:

"Promoting division between, or resentment of, a race, sex, religion, creed, nonviolent political affiliation, social class, or class of people."

You'll find this language maybe half of all the bills currently under consideration. Here are some recent examples.

legiscan.com/KS/text/SB515/…

legiscan.com/KY/text/HB14/i…

legiscan.com/MO/text/HB1554…

legiscan.com/CO/text/HB1206…

You'll even find it in Tennessee SB 623, which was signed into law last year. It is *illegal* in the state of Tennessee to include in your curricula any lecture, assignment, or reading that does this.

publications.tnsosfiles.com/acts/112/pub/p…

So let's be clear about what will happen now in the state of Tennessee. Teachers will have to ask themselves, "I want to assign this reading, but could it promote a feeling of resentment between two classes of people? Worse, could it cause one student to resent another?"

Again, a lot of the bills have this language. And you can see how easily it could be abused. Proponents of these bills should ask how a "woke" student might use it to shut down a discussion about gender. Lots of possible scenarios.

Anyway, it's late where I am. But you get the point. The details of these bills are so, so important. It's the details that determine their constitutionality, functionality, feasibility, and just the straightforward question of whether they will crush educators into powder.

Rufo doesn't care about details. He's a marketer. Brand management. He has no clue what they say or how they could be abused. View him accordingly.