U.S. district court strikes down controversial ‘divisive concepts’ law

Rundlett Middle School, looking down a hallway of sixth-grade classrooms on Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2016. 

Rundlett Middle School, looking down a hallway of sixth-grade classrooms on Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2016.  ELIZABETH FRANTZ/Monitor staff, file

By JEREMY MARGOLIS

Monitor staff

Published: 05-28-2024 3:37 PM

Modified: 05-29-2024 10:58 AM


A federal judge on Tuesday struck down New Hampshire’s controversial “divisive concepts” law, ruling that it is “unconstitutionally vague” in violation of the Constitution’s 14th amendment.

The summary judgment ruling by Judge Paul J. Barbadoro was celebrated by the state’s two teachers’ unions, House Democrats, and educational advocates, who have argued that the law infringes upon teachers’ autonomy and has a chilling effect in the classroom.

“All New Hampshire teachers and students won big today,” said Deb Howes, the president of the American Federation of Teachers – New Hampshire, one of the plaintiffs. “The vague, unconstitutional divisive concepts law was a dreadful effort to limit truthful discussion about history, gender, race and identity.”

Tuesday’s ruling was the nation’s first to strike down a “classroom censorship” law, according to the ACLU of New Hampshire.

The law, passed in 2021, banned teaching four concepts: first, any suggestion one group is superior to another based on race, sex, religion, or several other identity characteristics; second, any implication that any one group is “inherently racist [or] sexist”; third, any suggestion that an individual should be discriminated against or treated worse based on their identity; and fourth, any instruction that students “should not attempt to treat others without regard” for various identity characteristics.

The curricular bans “are viewpoint-based restrictions on speech that do not provide either fair warning to educators of what they prohibit or sufficient standards for law enforcement to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement,” Judge Barbadoro wrote in his ruling.

The “divisive concepts” law was part of a nationwide effort by Republicans to push back against what they have described as the insertion of critical race theory into curricula.

“[F]or those who promote Critical Race Theory or similar concepts, their thinking is not built on a foundation of common sense, but on ideology diametrically opposed to the truths found in our Declaration of Independence, that we are all created equal,” Frank Edelblut, the commissioner of the Department of Education and one of the defendants in the lawsuit, wrote in an Op-Ed in 2021.

Article continues after...

Yesterday's Most Read Articles

Shamir Darjee immigrated to Concord knowing no English. Now the 20-year-old just bought his family a house.
Opinion: Let’s keep our forests as forests
‘If it’s about us, it needs to include us’: As Concord weighs solutions to homelessness, people currently unhoused want a voice at the table
‘Woefully unprepared’ hiker refused to leave Sno-Cat atop Mt. Washington
‘Friends for life’: Concord woman becomes Best Buddies champion alongside high school buddy
Capital Vintage brings new affordable fits to Concord and soon, the Seacoast

Department of Education spokesperson Kim Houghton directed a request for comment on the ruling to the state’s Department of Justice.

“The State is currently reviewing the court’s order and will consider next steps including whether to appeal,” DOJ spokesperson Michael Garrity wrote in a statement.

The case is a consolidation of two lawsuits brought in 2021, one by the American Federation of Teachers and five of its members, and the other by the New Hampshire chapter of the National Education Association, and school administrators Andres Mejia and Christina Kim Philibotte. Mejia is the director of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and Kim Philibotte is the chief equity officer in the Manchester school district.

The plaintiffs in the second lawsuit contended in their complaint that educators were “pulling books from their curriculum” and avoiding instructing on core concepts in history.

“Can one discuss the reasons why in our country’s entire history only a single African American has ever been elected the President of the United States and no woman ever has?” they asked in their complaint.

Judge Barbadoro ruled that the answer to that question and others like it was not clear. He wrote that the laws do not articulate what concepts cannot be taught, do not demarcate when classroom discussion veers into impermissible teaching, and do not provide necessary guidance on when “extracurricular communications” may violate the law.

As a result, Barbadoro ruled, the law violates the vagueness standard of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, which requires a criminal law to clearly state what conduct would violate it.

“Today’s court victory means that educators across New Hampshire can nurture an equitable and inclusive school environment where all students are seen and heard,” Kim Philibotte and Mejia, two of the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

Jeremy Margolis can be reached at jmargolis@cmonitor.com.