The essence of the case revolves around the fact that FAU trustees and administrators disapproved of Tracy’s political views, expressed on his personal blog. They therefore utilized an unconstitutional prior restraint (“Outside Employment Policy”) barring Professor Tracy’s right to free speech as the basis for his dismissal. Moreover, to this day these very officials continue to use the same policy to limit university faculty and employee expression.
In 2017 a hostile court dismissed most of TracyvFAU’s First Amendment claims, ruling in favor of FAU and its administrators, and barring crucial evidence in advance of the case ever going to a jury.
Anticipating such a setback, the FCRC successfully engaged a prominent national law firm which, recognizing the case’s significance, brought the lower court ruling before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
An excerpt from #TracyvFAU appeal brief, filed yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.
This is what an unconstitutional #PriorRestraint at a public university looks like.
In June 2019 the Eleventh Circuit’s panel of judges granted the case oral argument. Such a hearing is less-than-common at the federal appellate level. TracyvFAU is scheduled to be heard the week of September 16, 2019 in Miami, Florida. We are uncertain of the judicial outcome, but are grateful that the case is under review at this momentous level.
The James Tracy Legal Defense Fund wants to thank all of you for your moral and/or monetary support along the way. Because we have taken on a state agency with unlimited resources, there is no way we could have endured this fight for over three long years without you.
Preview of New Documentary on TracyvFAU Federal Civil Rights Case Now on Appeal
Independent Media Solidarity proudly presents the first preview of our new feature-length film, The Conspiracy Theorist: What Happened to James Tracy Could Happen to You. From the makers of We Need to Talk About Sandy Hook, this forthcoming documentary goes behind the scenes of the most important First Amendment legal battle of our time: Professor James Tracy’s firing for his controversial online speech.
In 2015 Florida Atlantic University abruptly terminated Professor Tracy under a false pretext. When Tracy filed a federal civil rights lawsuit his attorneys discovered how university officials repeatedly schemed to defeat Tracy’s First Amendment rights without violating the US Constitution.
After a corrupt federal court threw out most of Tracy’s claims it then prevented the jury from viewing crucial evidence. News outlets continued to denigrate Tracy while publicly misreporting the case. The Conspiracy Theorist sets the record straight through extensive interview footage of Tracy, his legal team, and university witnesses and defendants.
Today social media play a gigantic role in our everyday lives. Will something you or your loved ones say online one day make you the target of harassment and defamation, perhaps even resulting in the loss of your livelihood? What happened to James Tracy could happen to you.
Blank Rounds Fired “To Expose Students to Sound of Gunfire”
Parents of children attending Bethel Park High School in southeastern Pennsylvania have protested the school and local police department’s firing of blank rounds during an active shooter drill, allegedly without the parents’ express consent.
At Bethel Park High School on Thursday, an active shooter drill is scheduled to get underway during an extended third period class.
This drill will include the sound of gunfire, but blanks will be fired, not real bullets. School Police and Bethel Park Police will conduct the exercise.
Nanette Adams has a son who just this year enrolled in the High School. She and some other parents contacted KDKA-TV News saying they were concerned about the drill; more specifically, the fact that blanks were bring used.
On a August 27th broadcast National Public Radio announced its finding that the US Department of Education’s most recent mass shooting figures at US public schools appear to be grossly inflated. This is especially significant since there are public misconceptions toward such events that stem in part from dubious statistics. These numbers are then often taken by gun control advocacy groups to mislead and frighten the public on the scope of the problem.
How many times per year does a gun go off in an American school?
We should know. But we don’t.
This spring the U.S. Education Department reported that in the 2015-2016 school year, “nearly 240 schools … reported at least 1 incident involving a school-related shooting.” The number is far higher than most other estimates.
But NPR reached out to every one of those schools repeatedly over the course of three months and found that more than two-thirds of these reported incidents never happened. Child Trends, a nonpartisan nonprofit research organization, assisted NPR in analyzing data from the government’s Civil Rights Data Collection.
We were able to confirm just 11 reported incidents, either directly with schools or through media reports.
In 161 cases, schools or districts attested that no incident took place or couldn’t confirm one. In at least four cases, we found, something did happen, but it didn’t meet the government’s parameters for a shooting. About a quarter of schools didn’t respond to our inquiries.
“When we’re talking about such an important and rare event, [this] amount of data error could be very meaningful,” says Deborah Temkin, a researcher and program director at Child Trends.
The “Land of the Free, Home of the Brave” has reached a new nadir under corporate police state control. Walmart is among the entities behind a program to equip public schools with five gallon capacity “safety” or “lockdown” buckets for readiness in the event the facility’s inhabitants undergo martial law for an extended period of time. Taking a page from “preppers” often lampooned in major media, the vessels will be stocked with first aid supplies and foodstuffs, and can even be used as latrines.
The idea of “shelter in place buckets” was floated shortly after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland Florida on February 14, 2018, as the video below suggests.
Louisiana’s WAFB carries the syndicated story attributed to CNN:
With classroom shootings on the minds of many, one Michigan high school is trying to make their students feel safer.
Heidi Hummel and her classmates are gearing up for their senior year at Clio High School, but back-to-school prep has taken a more somber tone after recent school shootings.
This year at Clio, every classroom will have what’s called a “safety bucket.”
“We are unloading them and using them in the event, if we ever needed them, for a lock down,” Hummel said. “And we can have them for food and supplies if we were ever locked down for a long time.”
The buckets will go into every classroom in the school district. Assistant Principal Kevin Ayre said the school needs the public’s help to fill the buckets with potentially life-saving supplies.
“They’re going to be filled with gauze, bandages, water – you know, necessities in the situation where we have to be in a long-term lockdown,” Ayre said.
Walmart donated at least 144 of the buckets, and students and faculty said they’re great because in the case of an emergency they could use them as bathrooms as well.
Santa Fe High School baseball player Rome Shubert claims he was “shot in the head” at the mass shooting at his school on May 18. Shubert only spent a short time in hospital before requesting the nurse call his mom, presumably so he could go home.
TheNew Nationalist provides a helpful overview of Shubert’s improbable wound:
At Santa Fe High School, we have a young man. Rome Shubert who unknowingly sustained a shot in the head and emerged unfazed. To quote CNN: “A bullet sliced clean through the back of the Santa Fe High School sophomore’s head … Remarkably, he walked away with just bandages, and said on Twitter he was “completely okay and stable.”
Acting on pure adrenaline, he said, he sprinted to a rear exit in the room and bounded over a 7-foot wall. That’s when Mr. Shubert realized he was covered in blood and he had been shot.
The young man’s mother, Sheri Shubert, chimed in, saying, “The doctors told me it went in clean and came out clean.” She added, “We have to do something. We have to take a stand. America has to take a stand for our kids.”
Yes, those special black-magic bullets again. No contusions or bruising, no swelling, no real effect on hearing except “ears ringing.”
The news that Israel killed more than 60 Palestinians on Monday alone, has sparked criticism from Americans who are frustrated with the United States’ failure to hold one of its closest allies accountable for the human rights violations it is committing—and individuals in one state will soon be labeled as “anti-Semitic” for openly voicing their opinion.
South Carolina will become the first state to legally define criticism of Israel as “anti-Semitism” when a new measure goes into effect on July 1, targeting public schools and universities. While politicians have tried to pass the measure as a standalone law for two years, they finally succeeded temporarily by passing it as a “proviso” that was slipped into the 2018-2019 budget.
Israeli filmmaker Yoav Shamir asks, “What is anti-Semitism today?” in his 2009 documentary, Defamation.
According to the text of the measure, the definition of “anti-Semitism” will now include:
a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities;
calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews; making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective; accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, the state of Israel, or even for acts committed by non-Jews;
accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust;
accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interest of their own nations;
using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or Israelis;
drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis;
blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political tensions;
applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation;
multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations;
denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist, provided, however, that criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.
As can be determined by the long list of ways in which South Carolina will now define “anti-Semitism,” individuals will be forced to tiptoe around a legitimate subject, and expressing an opinion that is no longer considered politically correct can now be legally used against them.
Calling out this bill is not antisemitic, it is pro free speech. Criticizing the Israeli government as well as any other government is the right and duty of all free humanity. Just as TFTP advocates for the freedom of Americans, we advocate for the freedom of Israelis and the Palestinians. Only through discussion and peaceful criticism will peace ever be achieved.