Alaska Supreme Court says North Slope principal's insult not protected by free speech
Alaska Supreme Court Justice Dario Borghesan, second from right, asks a question during oral arguments in a case concerning correspondence education allotments, on June 27, 2024, in the Boney Courthouse in Anchorage. (Photo by Andrew Kitchenman/Alaskaa Beacon)
Neither an Alaska free-speech law nor the First Amendment protect a former North Slope Borough principal fired for making a derogatory version of the local school district's logo, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled on Friday.
Former Point Lay school principal R. Brett Sterling had sued the North Slope Borough School District in 2022, alleging he was wrongfully fired from his job for incompetence and violating antidiscrimination rules.
Sterling's case revolves around a January 2022 incident in which he used school equipment to make coasters for himself and a fellow principal who was leaving the district.
Sterling modified the district's logo, which contains an illustration of children performing a blanket toss and the motto 'Striving for Excellence.'
Around the logo, Stirling wrote, 'Congratulations You survived NSBSD' and 'Time for a f—ing drink,' next to an image of two beer mugs. He replaced the motto with 'Striving for Excrement' and the district's name with 'New Stupid Behaviors Starting Daily.'
An image of the coasters spread on social media after a custodian saw the design, with most viewers seeing it as a racist remark toward the predominantly Alaska Native community and region.
After a hearing, the district fired Sterling. He challenged his termination, which was upheld in an administrative hearing. He appealed to Superior Court, arguing that the district violated his due process rights, that the coaster was an expression of free speech, and that the reasons for his firing weren't supported by sufficient evidence.
In August 2023, Judge David Roghair ruled in favor of the school district and upheld Sterling's firing. Roghair found that the district was within its right to find Sterling as incompetent because he was unable to perform his work as a principal after the local community saw his design.
Roghair wrote, 'Whether or not … Stirling interpreted the coaster to promote any view about Alaska Natives, the facts at hand support that the community was reasonable to interpret the coaster as racially offensive.'
Roghair rejected Sterling's free-speech argument, noting that the coaster was intended to be a private communication between himself and his friend, not a public message protected by the First Amendment.
In addition, Roghair wrote, 'the right to openly critique a government employer without fear of punishment does not extend to offensive or inappropriate speech.'
Sterling appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court, which ruled that 'Stirling's free speech rights are outweighed by the District's legitimate interests in avoiding workplace disruption, meeting the needs of its students and the public, and maintaining public trust in the school system. We thus hold that Stirling's termination did not violate his free speech rights.'
Alaska law contains a free-speech rule for teachers that is separate from the First Amendment, but in Friday's ruling, the court said that rule is 'coextensive' with the First Amendment, providing roughly equal protection.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over Alaska, has previously ruled that when it comes to free speech in education, a court can consider 'whether students and parents have expressed concern that the plaintiff's conduct has disrupted the school's normal operations, or has eroded the public trust between the school and members of its community.'
In this case, Sterling's conduct did cause that disruption, the Alaska Supreme Court said, thus rendering it unprotected by the First Amendment.
The court's justices did conclude that the school district made a due process error during Sterling's firing, however, and that as a result he is owed back pay for the period between his pre-firing hearing and his post-firing hearing.
Friday's order remands the case back to Superior Court for that issue but otherwise upholds the decision to fire Sterling.
Attorneys for both the plaintiff and the defendant did not answer emails seeking comment on Friday.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Mahmoud Khalil details psychological pain and reputational harm in new legal filings: ‘Efforts to erase my humanity'
The Columbia University student-activist at the center of a legal battle with Donald Trump's administration has filed dozens of pieces of evidence and statements outlining the 'irreparable harm' he faces in an immigration detention center in Louisiana. Mahmoud Khalil — who was arrested by federal agents nearly three months ago for his role leading pro-Palestinian demonstrations on campus — also submitted a declaration of his own, writing of the 'visceral' pain he experienced missing the birth of his son. 'Instead of holding my wife's hand in the delivery room, I was crouched on a detention center floor, whispering through a crackling phone line as she labored alone,' Khalil wrote. 'I listened to her pain, trying to comfort her while 70 other men slept around me. When I heard my son's first cries, I buried my face in my arms so no one would see me weep.' The massive tranche of filings unsealed on Thursday also include statements from Khalil's wife, his fellow Columbia students and professors, a former State Department official condemning his 'arbitrary' detention, and experts outlining the chilling effect of his arrest and Islamophobic reactions surrounding his case. Khalil's arrest has sparked protests across the country and fears the Trump administration is crushing political dissent by targeting demonstrations against Israel's devastating campaign in Gaza. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said he 'proudly' revoked hundreds of student visas over campus activism, leading to several high-profile arrests of international scholars. Khalil, who is Palestinian, grew up in a refugee camp in Syria. He entered the United States on a student visa in 2022 to pursue a master's degree in public administration, which he completed last year. He missed his graduation ceremony last month. 'As someone who fled persecution in Syria for my political beliefs, for who I am, I never imagined myself to be in immigration detention, here in the United States,' Khalil wrote in his declaration. Lawyers for Khalil argue he suffers 'irreparable harm from his arrest and detention' — including First Amendment violations, his separation from his wife and child, and 'psychological harm specific to his arrest and detention.' They also accuse the Trump administration of damaging Khalil's reputation 'by baselessly identifying him as a risk to the foreign policy of the United States, marking him and his family as targets for harassment and notoriety and severely undermining his ability to pursue a career in international diplomacy and human rights advocacy.' Khalil wrote that he was subject to 'dignitary and reputational harm, personal and familial hardship, including constant fear for personal safety, continued detention, restrictions on my freedom of expression, and severe damage to my professional future.' Statements from the Trump administration amounted to 'attacks' against him, amplified across social media and into the lives of his family, he said. 'These were not just attacks on my character,' he added. 'They were efforts to erase my humanity.' His wife Noor Abdalla described the moment Khalil met his newborn son through a plate glass window inside a detention center — one month after he was born. 'It was an awful feeling for all of us,' she wrote. 'Mahmoud was right there, but he could not touch his son.' The filings follow a federal judge's ruling that the Trump administration's attempt to deport Khalil on foreign policy grounds is likely unconstitutional. New Jersey District Judge Michael Farbiarz has asked for additional information before ruling on his release from detention. The administration has accused Khalil of 'antisemitic activities' and of supporting Hamas, which he has flatly rejected. He has not been charged with any crime, but officials claim Khalil can be removed over what Rubio has characterized as 'adverse foreign policy consequences.' Khalil also is seeking an order to block Rubio from relying on an obscure immigration law to similarly deport other activists. There are no further hearings scheduled in his parallel immigration court proceedings in Louisiana. The judge in that case has determined Khalil can be deported.
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
City blocked from applying vendor laws to beachside yoga classes
SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — A preliminary injunction was issued Wednesday by a federal appeals court in a lawsuit filed by two yoga instructors over the city of San Diego's crackdown on donation-based yoga classes at public parks and beaches under its vendor laws. The decision by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which reverses a lower court's partial dismissal of the case, blocks the city from enforcing the vendor law as it pertains to these longstanding classes while the case continues litigation. The ruling is a notable victory for the instructors, Steve Hubbard — also known as 'NamaSteve' — and Amy Baack, who first sued the city in federal court last year, asserting the application of the vendor law to their classes infringed on their First Amendment right to free speech. Local LGBTQ+ community deals with vandalism amid Pride Month A district court judge had previously rebuffed this part of their claim, arguing the law does not regulate what they said, rather their conduct. In its opinion, a three-judge panel at the court of appeals disagreed with the lower court's conclusion, arguing that the lecturing about yoga philosophy and spirituality is indivisible from the exercise aspects of the practice. 'A person who teaches yoga is communicating and disseminating information about this philosophy and practice through speech and expressive movements,' Judge Holly Thomas wrote for the panel in its opinion. 'Like vocational training classes, Hubbard's and Baack's classes aim to impart a specific skill and communicate advice derived from specialized knowledge.' The opinion adds the city's ordinance is clearly content-based in the way it was written, expressly allowing the teaching of some subjects like tai chi and Shakespeare's plays at shoreline parks and beaches but not others. Given this interdependence, San Diego would have to have a compelling public interest to place narrow restrictions on activities like yoga in outdoor spaces — something the appeals court judges did not appear convinced the city had demonstrated at this point in the case. These factors, Thomas said, makes Hubbard and Baack's constitutional challenge likely to prevail on the merits. Now, the case has been remanded back to the district court judge for further litigation. In a statement, a spokesperson for the city attorney's office said they were 'evaluating the decision and potential next steps.' FOX 5/KUSI has also reached out to the Parks and Recreation Department for comment on the injunction and is awaiting response. Ambulance rides in San Diego just got more expensive — this is why The lawsuit is one of two the yoga instructors have filed since San Diego park rangers began ramping up enforcement of beachside yoga last year. Hubbard and Baack also filed a lawsuit in state court on similar grounds after their federal claim was partially dismissed. The crackdown at the center of the instructors' lawsuits came after the city council voted to expand existing laws requiring permits for commercial vendors to use public spaces to encompass activities like the classes and luxury picnics. Hubbard and Baack received a number of citations from park rangers for violating this law as the city ratcheted up enforcement. One of these citations, Hubbard alleges, was given to him for teaching a class via YouTube from his backyard to people who were doing the exercises at a beach. As the case continues, Hubbard says he plans to resume teaching beachside yoga classes as early as Thursday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Mahmoud Khalil responds to charges against him for the first time in new legal filings, and describes the ‘irreparable harm' of his detention
Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate at the center of a high-profile deportation fight with the US government over his pro-Palestinian views, personally responded to the government's claims that he's a threat to foreign policy for the first time in a sworn legal declaration unsealed Thursday. The declaration from Khalil comes after a New Jersey federal judge ruled last month that the government's use of an obscure immigration law to detain and deport him is 'likely unconstitutional.' Khalil was among the first in a series of high-profile arrests of pro-Palestinian students as the Trump administration moved to crack down on antisemitism on college campuses. Khalil's attorneys filed a massive tranche of legal declarations late Wednesday – including a sworn statement from Khalil himself – that paints a vivid picture of his mental anguish inside a Louisiana detention facility. The filings also include declarations from Columbia University students and professors, legal experts, and a former ICE legal advisor on the chilling effects and lasting impacts of Khalil's arrest and detention. 'As someone who fled prosecution in Syria for my political beliefs, for who I am, I never imagined myself to be in immigration detention, here in the United States,' Khalil wrote in his multi-page declaration. 'Why should protesting this Israel government's indiscriminate killing of thousands of innocent Palestinians result in the erosion of my constitutional rights?' While a graduate student at Columbia, Khalil, a Palestinian refugee, acted as a liaison between student protesters and school administrators during the pro-Palestinian demonstrations on campus in 2024. The Trump administration has argued that Khalil's actions pose a threat to its foreign policy goal of combatting antisemitism and in April, the administration outlined its evidence against him in a two-page memo written by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. But Khail's attorneys have argued the memo does not describe criminal activity and that the Trump administration is instead targeting him for his political speech in support of Palestinian rights, in violation of the First Amendment. 'The only ground the government has ever relied on in this case to justify Mahmoud's detention is the foreign policy ground,' Alina Das, one of Khalil's attorneys, said during a news conference Thursday. 'We're hopeful (the judge) will order his release based on all of the evidence that we've submitted,' Das said. This is a developing story and will be updated.
