News Alert

Deborah Vailes has been teaching junior high in Louisiana’s Rapides Parish School District for the past twelve years.  She is passionate about helping special needs children become better readers.  Little did she know that an early morning post critical of the Common Core Curriculum on her personal Facebook page would lead to disciplinary action, suppression of her right to free speech, retaliation from school officials, and possible loss of her job.

As a result, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, this morning, filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on behalf of Deborah Vailes against the Rapides Parish School District and the principal of Pineville Junior High School, Dr. Dana Nolan.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commenting on the reason for the lawsuit, stated: “Public school students have become ‘guinea pigs’ in a vast untested educational experiment dictated by the Federal Government. Our Constitution never envisioned federal control over education.  But sadly, most states have voluntarily abdicated their responsibilities over education for federal dollars. Their decision will prove disastrous, not only for public education, but also for the freedom guaranteed by our Constitution.  Debbie Vailes’ uncompromising love for her students prompted her to speak out.  And her voice should not be silenced by a tyrannical principal.”

Facts

On September 23, 2014, at approximately by 5:58 AM, Debora Vailes re-posted on her personal Facebook page a photograph of a little girl crying because of the shortcomings of Common Core.  Later that day, her school principal, Dr. Dana Nolan, after discovering the post, gave Deborah Vailes her first written reprimand and ordered her to refrain from expressing any opinion about public education on social media and to remove her anti-Common Core post from the social media site – ASAP. (The school district refers to written reprimands as a “documented conferences.”)  Dr. Nolan further informed Deborah that she could not to discuss her opinion in public – on any social media or any public forum.

Two days later, Dr. Nolan held a mandatory faculty meeting of the Pineville Junior high school. She informed the faculty at the meeting that Deborah Vailes was reprimanded due to posting a negative opinion about Common Core on Facebook.  Dr. Nolan warned the faculty not to share their personal opinions or speak-out in any way.  After hearing about the Principal’s gag order, Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, issued an executive order that teachers were to be afforded the same constitutional guarantees afforded to all citizens. However, his executive order did not deter the Defendant, Dr. Nolan, from continuing her vendetta against Deborah Vailes.

Before Vailes posted her Facebook criticism of Common Core, she had a stellar personnel record; she had never received a reprimand.  Since her public criticism, she has received three additional written reprimands. School administrators are now constantly visiting her class, when before her criticism of Common Core, such visits were rare.  Dr. Nolan has stripped Debbie Vailes of her responsibilities, and placed her in a job category which, according to Vailes’ colleagues, will be eliminated at the end of the school year resulting in her termination.

TMLC Senior Trial Counsel Erin Mersino and Alexandria, Louisiana attorney, Theodore D. Vicknair are representing Deborah Vailes.   Mersino stated “Accepting employment in the public sector does not mean a total loss of First Amendment freedom.  Public employees may readily comment on matters of public concern, such as the Common Core Curriculum, and do so free from any retaliation from their employer.  What the School District and Principal are doing to Debbie Vailes is blatantly wrong.”

 Click here to read TMLC’s entire Complaint

 Difficulties with Common Core State Standards

Common Core State Standards (“Common Core”) are national standards in education promoted and funded by the U.S. Department of Education.  The National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers together established Common Core as a set of academic standards to be used in common across all states. These standards replace the existing state standards in the applicable academic areas.

Although Common Core has been adopted by 43 states (including Louisiana), its implementation has caused an uproar from caring parents, grandparents and educators alike. According to an October 2014 Gallup poll, 62% of teachers are frustrated with the Common Core State Standards.

Adding to the frustration is the fact that the Common Core Standards were untested prior to their implementation.  They were implemented without any prior research being conducted on their efficacy, resulting in standards that at best reflect guesswork. Many child development experts have decried even the creation of the standards without input from classroom teachers or early childhood professionals.

Compounding the anger over the standards themselves was the overwhelming emphasis on standardized testing. The Common Core State Standards require so much testing, that teachers can only teach to the test.

Moreover, Common Core’s method for teaching math over-complicates and adds numerous seemingly illogical steps to solving math problems.

Many parents and teachers have also expressed concern over the English Standards set by the Common Core. The reading selections considered to be representative examples of what students should be reading, feature incest, rape and drug use, as well as far left political viewpoints.

In what CNN billed as an epic “debate,” Alabama’s Chief Justice Roy Moore, gave CNN’s host of “New Day” Chris Cuomo a lesson in the law.

Obviously acting as a stalking horse for the same-sex marriage crowd, Cuomo attempted to embarrass Justice Moore with his questions, but, to his apparent chagrin Justice Moore continued to calmly correct him on the facts and the law.  Realizing he was losing the “debate,” Cuomo kept on changing the questions, and Justice Moore continued to school Cuomo in Constitutional law.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, said, “As the law currently stands, Justice Moore is right.  And I applaud him for his courageous and dignified stand for both the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Alabama.”    

To get a full understanding of Justice Moore’s legal reasoning, read the legal memorandum he sent to Alabama Probate Judges, dated February 3, 2015.        

This is the legal memo Justice Moore sent to the Probate Judges.

In a letter dated January 27, 2015 to Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, Justice Moore stated that, “As of this date, 44 federal courts have imposed by judicial fiat same-sex marriages in 21 states of the Union, overturning the express will of the people in those states. If we are to preserve that ‘reverent morality which is our source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement,’ then we must act to oppose such tyranny!”

During the televised interview, Cuomo demanded to know whether Justice Moore would follow a federal court decision that legalized same-sex marriages. However, Cuomo himself refused to answer the question posed to him several times throughout the debate: whether or not he would follow the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision which held that people of African ancestry were not entitled to citizenship or constitutional protections.  Chief Justice Moore makes it clear that according to the US Constitution, the definition of marriage belongs to the states and should be left to the people of each state to decide.

Proving that Justice Moore’s analysis that the original preliminary injunction against the state attorney general was ineffective because he had no jurisdiction over marriages in Alabama, yesterday, the federal district judge allowed plaintiffs to amend their complaint and add probate judge Don Davis as a defendant so that the court’s injunction could temporarily allow gay marriages to take place. 

The Thomas More Law Center has launched a national strategy for the protection of traditional marriage headed by TMLC senior trial counsel Erin Mersino. As a part of that strategy, TMLC has submitted numerous amicus briefs in key same-sex marriage cases on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders. One of the purposes of these briefs is to negate the homosexual community’s fallacious argument that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is the same as racial discrimination. To date, TMLC has filed four briefs with the Supreme Court, as well as with the 5^th and 6^th Circuit Courts in support of traditional marriage.

Last Friday afternoon (January 16), the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the 6^th Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in DeBoer v. Snyder and three other cases which upheld state laws defining marriage exclusively as the union of one man and one woman.  The 6^th Circuit Court’s DeBoer decision upheld laws preserving traditional marriage in Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee and Kentucky.  Written by Judge Jeffrey Sutton, the DeBoer decision was the only one of five court of appeals decisions which upheld the vote of citizens on traditional marriage.

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a friend of the court brief (amicus brief) supporting traditional marriage in the 6^th Circuit’s DeBoer case on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders (Coalition).

Richard Thompson, the TMLC’s president and Chief Counsel, commented, “The 6^th Circuit was the only Court of Appeals that sustained the will of the people expressed by their overwhelming votes in favor of traditional marriage.  And if the Supreme Court strikes down these state laws defining traditional marriage, it will be the worst example of judicial activism since Roe v. Wade.  It will lead to further persecution of Christians who oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds, and over time, the ultimate the demise of marriage and Western civilization as we know it.” 

Continued Thompson, “The notion of same-sex marriage has been foisted on our culture by well-planned and executed public relations campaigns and the tremendous influence of militant homosexual activists in the news media, entertainment industry and most of academia.”

Aside from its briefs in the DeBoer case at both the appellate and Supreme Court level, the TMLC has played a prominent role in the defense of traditional marriage.  It was instrumental in crafting the language of Michigan’s constitutional amendment defending traditional marriage which was passed by fifty-nine percent of Michigan voters.  The other states covered by the 6^th Circuit’s DeBoer decision passed their laws defining traditional marriage by overwhelming votes, as well: Kentucky by seventy-four percent, Ohio by sixty-two percent, and Tennessee by eighty percent.  Moreover, the TMLC has filed amicus briefs on behalf of the Coalition in support of traditional marriage in several other federal appellate courts across the country. 

Will the Court be willing to nullify thousand of same-sex marriages in states where courts have already allowed it?  The language of the Supreme Court’s order granting review has caused a great deal of speculation on what the court will do.  The order specifically limited the argument to two issues: “1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? 2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?”

The Justices will hear oral arguments in the case in April 2015, and render their decision before by the end of June 2015.  The Court has allotted a total of two and half hours for oral arguments.  Many Court observers have opined that the Court decided to hear the case as a clear sign there are enough votes in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage in all states.  However, to render that kind of decision, the court would have to find that a state has no rational basis for their laws defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman.  Whatever the final outcome, it will likely be a 5-4 decision with Justice Kennedy as the swing vote.  

In 2014, TMLC launched a national strategy to defend traditional marriage and formed a legal team headed by senior trial counsel Erin Mersino and co-counsels William R. Wagner and John S. Kane of Lansing, MI as part of an effort to stem the onslaught of federal cases overturning the definition of traditional marriage that were passed by overwhelming majorities of voters. 

TMLC’s legal team has worked extensively to file legal briefs on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders in significant cases dealing with same-sex marriage. One of the purposes of these briefs is to negate the homosexual community’s fallacious argument that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is the same as racial discrimination. To date, TMLC has filed four briefs with the Supreme Court, as well as with the 5^th and 6^th Circuit Courts in support of traditional marriage.

Asserting that marriage should be reinforced, not redefined, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national, nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI filed its fourth amicus brief (friend of the court brief) in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting traditional marriage this past Friday (December 19th). The amicus brief, which was filed on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders (Coalition), supported the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in the case of Deboer v. Snyder, which upheld Michigan’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman as constitutional. 

The Sixth Circuit Court’s decision in DeBoer examined the laws defining marriage as exclusively the union of one man and one woman in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, ruling all four passed constitutional review. 

This latest TMLC brief is part of an effort to stem the onslaught of federal cases overturning the definition of traditional marriage which were passed by overwhelming majorities of voters.  TMLC formed a legal team consisting of TMLC’s senior trial counsel, Erin Mersino, and Co-counsels William R. Wagner and John S. Kane of Lansing, MI.  TMLC has been filing briefs on behalf of the Coalition in significant cases dealing with traditional marriage.  One of the purposes of these briefs is to negate the homosexual community’s fallacious argument that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is the same as racial discrimination. 

TMLC’s brief pointed out that, “There is no surer way to destroy an institution like marriage than to destroy its meaning. If ‘marriage’ means whatever a political activist, a cherry-picked plaintiff, or an appointed judge wants it to mean, it means nothing. If it has no fixed meaning, it is merely a vessel for a judge’s will. It is a subterfuge for judicial legislation.”

TMLC’s brief went on to observe, “The voters of Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee, by an overwhelming majority, affirmed a truth upon which our nation was founded and has flourished for over two hundred years: that the natural family is the optimal environment in which children should be raised. Human history, scientific observations of human biology, and our own experience, common sense and reason tell us that children naturally come exclusively from opposite sex unions, and children benefit from being raised by their biological parents whenever possible.”

In conclusion, TMLC’s brief asked the Supreme Court to grant the request for a review and uphold the Sixth Circuit’s opinion that correctly abstained from redefining the State-approved meaning of marriage, or in the alternative deny the petition for review to allow the Sixth Circuit’s well-reasoned decision to stand.   

Click here to read TMLC’s entire brief

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a member of the Restore Military Religious Freedom Coalition (Coalition), was signatory to a letter addressed to Secretary of the Army, John McHugh. This letter, made public earlier this week (December 17^th) defends the actions of Captain (CPT) Joseph Lawhorn, a Chaplain with the 5^th Ranger Training Battalion. Chaplain Lawhorn, was issued a Letter of Concern because he referenced scripture while presenting a mandatory suicide awareness and prevention briefing in which he described his own personal struggles with depression.

CPT Lawhorn earned his Ranger tab in 1999, was deployed to Afghanistan in 2011, and has served as the Chaplain for 5^th Ranger Training Battalion since December 2012.

An alarming aspect of this case is the fact that Chaplain Lawhorn’s superior, Colonel David G. Fivecoat, issued the Letter of Concern on his own initiative based on an article in the Huffington Post. No soldier attending Chaplain Lawhorn’s presentation made a formal complaint, nor was the Chaplain ever given the opportunity to defend his actions before the Letter of Concern was issued.

The Coalition’s letter requests that the Letter of Concern be withdrawn as Colonel Fivecoat  “misjudged the law and disciplined Chaplain Lawhorn without justification.”  Chaplain Lawhorn, a senior captain who is eligible for promotion to major, could be negatively affected by the Letter of Concern.

The Restore Military Religious Freedom Coalition was formed to defend the religious rights of members of our Armed Forces after a number of events occurred within the US Armed Forces that raised significant concerns about the status of the religious liberties so greatly prized by all Americans.