Latest news with #FoundingFathers
Fox News
3 days ago
- General
- Fox News
Founding Fathers understood parental rights are natural rights. Trump knows it, too
One hundred years ago, in 1925, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a powerful message in Pierce v. Society of Sisters: "The child is not the mere creature of the state," and parents have the fundamental right "to direct the upbringing and education of" their children. This wasn't just a legal victory—it was a triumph for families, a declaration that parents, not bureaucrats, know what's best for their kids. As we mark this milestone, we celebrate President Donald Trump, a leader whose fight for parental rights echoes the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, who saw the family as sacred and rooted in natural law. With a Supreme Court ruling on Mahmoud v. Taylor on the horizon, let's reflect on why this matters and why the legacy of Pierce resonates at kitchen tables across America. Parental rights are more than a legal concept—they're a God-given responsibility, woven into the fabric of human nature. The Founding Fathers understood this deeply. John Adams wrote in 1778, "The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families," emphasizing that parents are the first teachers of virtue, shaping children into citizens capable of sustaining a free republic. Thomas Jefferson, inspired by natural law, believed parents' role in guiding their children's education and morals was essential to liberty. Drawing from John Locke's philosophy, they saw parental authority as a natural right, predating government itself—a right to raise, love, and prepare children for the world without state overreach. This belief is why the Constitution, through the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, protects unlisted rights like those of parents, ensuring families remain free from arbitrary control. The Pierce decision brought this vision to life, striking down an Oregon law that tried to force children into public schools, sidelining parents 'choices. The Court affirmed that parents have the right to decide how their kids are educated—whether through public schools, private institutions, homeschooling, or faith-based learning. This ruling speaks to every Mom and Dad sitting down with their kids, teaching them values, faith, and the skills to thrive. It's about ensuring your daughter's school respects your family's beliefs or that your son's education aligns with your vision for his future. It's a promise that your children belong to you, not the government. President Trump embodies this legacy. Like the Founders, he respects natural law and the sanctity of the family as the cornerstone of a strong America. Last August, at the Joyful Warriors Summit in Washington, D.C., I had the privilege of interviewing him while he was on the campaign trail. In between Lee Greenwood's Proud to be an American filling the room with patriotic pride and us dancing together to YMCA, I asked him about the injustice of parents being labeled domestic terrorists for simply questioning what their children were learning in school. His response was unwavering: he promised to stop that on day one. True to his word, President Trump has kept that promise, putting parents firmly in the driver's seat. His push for school choice empowers parents to pick the best education for their kids, not just the one the government dictates. He's fought to keep Washington out of your family's business, protecting your right to pass on your religious values and ensuring schools don't push agendas without your consent. Furthermore, through his leadership in empowering the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, Trump is championing efforts to end chronic childhood disease, giving parents the tools and support to safeguard their children's health from preventable illnesses. As John Adams believed parents shape the nation's moral foundation, Trump's policies—cutting red tape in education, supporting family-friendly tax breaks, defending religious freedom, and promoting health initiatives through MAHA—reflect that same conviction. When schools or officials try to sideline parents, Trump's been clear: "Not on my watch." His leadership mirrors the Founders' warning against government overreach, like Samuel Adams' 1772 call to protect personal liberties from arbitrary state control. Parental rights come with profound responsibilities. It's not just about the freedom to raise your kids—it's about the duty to prepare them for life, making tough calls about their schooling, values, and well-being. This duty, as Locke and the Founders saw it, is written in our hearts, not granted by any law. Pierce protects your ability to fulfill that calling, ensuring you can guide your children with love and conviction. A Supreme Court decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor to allow opt-outs would further cement this right, empowering parents to protect their children's moral and religious upbringing. Cases like Mahmoud v. Taylor offer a chance to strengthen this protection, reinforcing that schools and officials must respect your voice in your kids 'education and upbringing. Why does this matter? Because strong families build a strong America. When parents are free to raise their children as they see fit, communities flourish, and kids grow up ready to lead. But when the government meddles—pushing rules or ideas that exclude parents—it erodes the liberty the Founders fought for. Pierce stopped that overreach a century ago, and Trump's fight keeps that spirit alive, ensuring parents have a say in a world where it's easy to feel drowned out. His broader vision—tax cuts that let families keep more of their hard-earned money, protecting faith-based groups, demanding transparency in schools, and empowering MAHA to tackle chronic childhood disease—shows he understands families are America's backbone. As we celebrate the 100th anniversary of Pierce v. Society of Sisters, let's honor the Founders' belief in the family as a sacred institution and Trump's commitment to keeping parents first, including his efforts through MAHA to ensure children grow up healthy and free from chronic disease. Let's raise a glass—at our kitchen tables, where the real work of raising kids happens—and commit to a future where every parent has the freedom to guide their children's path. Because when parents are in the driver's seat, America's future shines bright.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
'60 Minutes' reporter Lesley Stahl says she's angry with CBS' Shari Redstone over Trump lawsuit
Longtime CBS journalist Lesley Stahl admitted she was "angry" with Paramount Global chairwoman Shari Redstone over how things are being handled over President Donald Trump's lawsuit against the network on Friday. The "60 Minutes" reporter discussed the ongoing lawsuit and its effects on her program on The New Yorker Radio Hour podcast. She reflected on top producer Bill Owens stepping down in what she called a "painful" experience after he claimed that he was being restrained by the network on what stories to produce. After CBS News president Wendy McMahon's abrupt resignation, she called the situation at the network "hard" and partially blamed Redstone for putting pressure on them in what appears to be an appeasement to the Trump administration. "To have a news organization come under corporate pressure—to have a news organization told by a corporation, 'do this, do that with your story, change this, change that, don't run that piece.' I mean, it steps on the First Amendment, it steps on the freedom of the press," Stahl said. "It steps on what we stand for. It makes me question whether any corporation should own a news operation. It is very disconcerting." '60 Minutes' Producers Rail Against Trump's 'Bulls---' Lawsuit, Dread Prospects Of Paramount Making Settlement Still, she declined to use the word "turmoil" to describe the situation, although she revealed there was consideration for journalists to leave "en masse" after Owens' resignation. Stahl added that there's a sense of "fragility" in the press now thanks to things like Trump's "frivolous lawsuit" and a lack of trust in the media. Read On The Fox News App "The pain in my heart is that the public does not appreciate the importance of a free and strong and tough press in our democracy," Stahl said. "Even the Founding Fathers recognized that we need to have a strong fourth estate to hold our elected officials accountable, and to continue to cleanse the system. The public doesn't seem to want what we do to be part of our public life." She predicted Paramount Global, CBS' parent company, will ultimately settle with Trump to complete a merger with Skydance Media. If that were to occur, she hoped that the new owners would "hold the freedom of the press up as a beacon." The interview was recorded before news broke on Friday about Trump rejecting a $15 million settlement for his $20 billion lawsuit. Fox News Digital confirmed that the president's team is demanding at least $25 million and an apology from CBS News. Last October, Trump sued CBS News and Paramount for $10 billion over allegations of election interference involving the "60 Minutes" interview of then-Vice President Kamala Harris that aired weeks before the presidential election (the amount has since jumped to $20 billion). The lawsuit alleges CBS News deceitfully edited an exchange Harris had with "60 Minutes" correspondent Bill Whitaker, who asked her why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wasn't "listening" to the Biden administration. Harris was widely mocked for the "word salad" answer that aired in a preview clip of the interview on "Face the Nation." '60 Minutes' Reporter Lesley Stahl Admits Worry About Future Of Legacy Media: 'I'm Very Dark About It' However, when the same question aired during a primetime special on the network, Harris had a different, more concise response. Critics at the time accused CBS News of deceitfully editing Harris' "word salad" answer to shield the Democratic nominee from further backlash leading up to Election Day. Stahl denied there was any effort to make Harris look better and that the network simply aired two different halves of the answer. She claimed the lawsuit is being made only to intimidate them. "What is really behind it, in a nutshell, is [an effort] to chill us. There aren't any damages. I mean, he accused us of editing Kamala Harris in a way to help her win the election. But he won the election," Stahl said. Fox News Digital reached out to CBS and Paramount Global for a article source: '60 Minutes' reporter Lesley Stahl says she's angry with CBS' Shari Redstone over Trump lawsuit
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bush-appointed judge torches Trump with 27 exclamation points — and a gumbo recipe — in ruling against an executive order
A conservative federal judge has ruled that Donald Trump's executive order punishing a law firm tied to his political opponents 'must be struck down in its entirety as unconstitutional,' dealing yet another blow to the president's retaliatory campaign against lawyers and legal groups that opposed his agenda. 'Indeed, to rule otherwise would be unfaithful to the judgment and vision of the founding fathers!' wrote Judge Richard Leon in Washington D.C. Leon's colorful 73-page opinion uses 27 exclamation points — including in the very second sentence — and compares Trump's executive order against the law firm WilmerHale to a gumbo that gives him 'heartburn,' whose recipe he included. 'The cornerstone of the American system of justice is an independent judiciary and an independent bar willing to tackle unpopular cases, however daunting,' wrote Leon, who was appointed by George W. Bush. 'The Founding Fathers knew this! Accordingly, they took pains to enshrine in the Constitution certain rights that would serve as the foundation for that independence,' he added. But nearly 250 years later, 'several executive orders have been issued directly challenging these rights and that independence' within the last few months, Leon wrote. Trump's executive orders single out individual firms that worked for prominent Democratic officials or represented causes he opposed while imposing punitive measures on the law firms like banning their employees from federal buildings and stripping their security clearances. Several firms arranged deals with the Trump administration — including agreeing to perform millions of dollars in pro-bono work — to avoid the president's sanctions. WilmerHale had previously employed former special counsel Robert Mueller, who returned to the firm after leading the investigation into whether Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election to boost Trump's chances of winning. The firm also represented Democrats against Trump's 2020 election challenges, members of Congress seeking his tax records, and inspectors general who sued Trump after they were abruptly terminated at the start of his administration, among others. In his order on March 27, Trump claimed the firm 'abandoned the profession's highest ideals and abused its pro bono practice to engage in activities that undermine justice and the interests of the United States.' The order accuses so-called 'Big Law' firms of actions that 'threaten public safety and national security, limit constitutional freedoms, degrade the quality of American elections, or undermine bedrock American principles.' In his order, Judge Leon slammed the administration for throwing 'a kitchen sink of severe sanctions on WilmerHale for this protected conduct!' He added: 'Taken together, the provisions constitute a staggering punishment for the firm's protected speech! It both threatens and imposes sanctions and uses other means of coercion to suppress WilmerHale's representation of disfavored causes and clients.' Leon said Trump's executive order is clearly 'motivated by the president's desire to retaliate against WilmerHale for its protected activity.' This is 'not a legitimate government interest, and the order's unsupported assertion of national security will not save it!' he wrote. In a footnote in his ruling, Leon said Trump's executive order is 'akin to a gumbo.' Sections of the order outlining sanctions against the firm 'are the meaty ingredients—e.g., the Andouille, the okra, the tomatoes, the crab, the oysters,' Leon wrote. 'But it is the roux … which holds everything together,' he added, pointing to the president's justification for attacking the firm. 'A gumbo is served and eaten with all the ingredients together, and so too must the sections of the Order be addressed together,' Leon wrote. 'This gumbo gives the Court heartburn.' Several federal judges in recent days have struck down similar orders. Last week, District Judge John Bates, another Bush appointee, blocked a near-identical order targeting the firm Jenner Block after finding it was clear retaliation for the firm's employment of Andrew Weissmann, whom Trump accused of making a career out of 'weaponized government and abuse of power.' 'Like the others in the series, this order … makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents and a lawyer Jenner once employed,' Bates wrote. Another federal judge is currently weighing a decision in a similar case against Trump's order targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey.
New York Times
25-05-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
These Founding Fathers Were Frenemies. Maybe We Can Learn Something.
Thomas Jefferson's Monticello is one of the most beloved sites in America, drawing more than 300,000 visitors a year up a steep mountain road to enjoy majestic views of the Virginia Piedmont and house tours that can feel like stepping into its creator's complicated mind. But in 1775, it was a muddy construction site — and, as a guide told a tour group gathered on its front portico on a recent morning, a pretty good metaphor for the not-quite-born United States itself. 'Things were just getting started, and they weren't going great,' the guide said. After a decade of escalating tensions between Britain and the colonists, a shooting war had broken out in Massachusetts. The Continental Congress formed an army, appointing an upstanding Virginian, George Washington, to lead it. 'Which, by the way,' the guide noted wryly, 'was John Adams's idea.' Virginia may be a purple state these days, but the area around Monticello is still rock-ribbed Jefferson country. Heading south, you can follow Thomas Jefferson Parkway to Jefferson Vineyards. Go a few miles north, to downtown Charlottesville, and you hit 'Mr. Jefferson's university,' as some still reverentially call it. But as the 250th anniversary of American independence approaches, his fellow founder and sometime nemesis is getting prominent billing up at Monticello, thanks to 'Founding Friends, Founding Foes,' a new tour built around the fraught 50-year relationship between Jefferson and Adams. The tour uses spaces in the magnificent house Jefferson designed, and items he kept close to him, to unpack their lifelong frenemyship. That often-fractious relationship stretched from their collaboration on the Declaration of Independence to Jefferson's defeat of Adams in the 1800 presidential election to their deaths, hours apart, on July 4, 1826. The tour explores the vicious partisan politics of the 1790s, and the rise of the two-party system we know (and may love or hate) today. And it invites guests to reflect on parallels with today's toxic politics and hyperpolarization, whether on the drive home or during special dinner table civic conversations — or as Jefferson would have put it, 'feasts of reason' — held on the grounds after some tours. These days, the Mountaintop, as Jefferson called the upper reaches of his 5,000-acre estate, is in exquisite condition, thanks to a multiyear effort to restore its buildings, gardens and fields to the way they looked in his retirement years. But down below, in the country he helped create, many fear that the grand edifice of American democracy is teetering. And Monticello is asking a question: Can leaning into the messy, complicated, nasty, origins of our partisan political system save us? A Complicated Legacy Monticello, which is owned and operated by the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, a private nonprofit group, has dealt with difficult questions before, if not always willingly. For decades, it presented a hagiographic image of Jefferson, saying little about the nearly 400 people enslaved there over his lifetime. That started to shift in the early 1990s, when the foundation created its first tour focused on slavery, even as some accused it of continuing to downplay the darker side of Jefferson's story. But things changed drastically after 2000, when the foundation announced, in the wake of DNA research and scholarship by historians led by Annette Gordon-Reed, that it had accepted longstanding claims that Jefferson had fathered six children with Sally Hemings, an enslaved woman. Today, Monticello is seen as a leader among historical houses grappling with slavery. It runs a continuing oral history project about the enslaved community there and its descendants, who have gathered here for reunions. And it offers various in-depth tours and exhibits dedicated to slavery, a subject that is also woven into every tour, including 'Founding Friends, Founding Foes.' At Monticello, the new tour is described not as a pivot, but a continuation of its commitment to difficult conversations — and to meeting its diverse stakeholders where they are. Jane Kamensky, a historian of the American Revolution who left Harvard last year to become president of Monticello, said the new tour grew out of research showing that many visitors wanted more political history, and more about Jefferson's career. It also reflects her conviction that Monticello can be a 'civic engine' for thinking about our current divides — and modeling how, as she puts it, to disagree better. 'On the tour, you hopefully feel a sense of inspiration around the possibility of this political friendship recovering itself, this civic friendship recovering itself,' Kamensky said. 'And then maybe you're inspired to call your uncle who you fell out with over Thanksgiving because you supported Trump and he supported Harris.' That might sound like 18th-century pie in the sky thinking, even without the ratcheting tensions of the second Trump administration. In a much-noted 2019 paper on partisanship, two political scientists reported survey data showing that 16 percent of Republicans and 20 percent of Democrats had sometimes thought the country would be better off if large numbers of people from the other side 'just died.' But for Kamensky, the fact that Jefferson himself is a lightning rod, who draws defenders, haters and everything in between, gives Monticello an advantage. 'I don't envy the president of the Lincoln presidential library,' she said. 'Everyone knows how they feel about Lincoln and feels affirmed in their admiration of him. But Jefferson is a nonconsensus figure.' Monticello's research shows it draws a broad mix of visitors from across the political spectrum, including more conservatives than other historic houses and museums, whose visitors skew more liberal than American adults as a whole. For some here, that reality was driven home on Jan. 7, 2021, when people stopped by for tours on their way home from Washington, wearing shirts and hats from the 'Stop the Steal' rally the day before. Sam Saunders, a retired civil engineer who has been a guide for nine years, said that was a challenging day at Monticello, though there were no incidents, and it was impossible to know if any of those visitors were among those who had gone on to storm the Capitol after the rally. 'Maybe some of the fuss was in our own emotions,' he said. And even on normal days, he added, it was important not to pass judgment on visitors based on hats, clothing or other cues. 'You can't assume people feel a certain way,' he said. Holly Haliniewski, a guide here for nearly seven years, said that in the intense months since President Trump returned to office, Monticello had been a tonic. 'It's been so good to come to work here, rather than sitting at home in my silo,' she said. 'This is one of the last places where people do come together, which makes me hopeful.' Bridging the Divide Guides at Monticello are familiar with emotional, and sometimes hostile, visitor reactions, particular around slavery. Still, at a recent all-day training session, some guides expressed nervousness about inviting a conversation about 2025 politics, even on a tour whose overt content stays firmly in the past. Brandon Dillard, Monticello's director of historic interpretation and audience engagement, offered reassurance. 'All of you are excellent at talking about racism and the legacy of slavery in America,' he said. 'I think you can handle a conversation about partisanship.' Each of the roughly four dozen guides at Monticello writes their own tour, within set parameters. Earlier this year, as part of the training for 'Founding Friends, Founding Foes,' Monticello organized daylong sessions with historians and political scientists. On this day in late February, the speakers were leaders from BridgeUSA and Living Room Conversations, two of the hundreds of 'bridging' organizations that have sprung up in recent years on campuses and in communities, with the mission of promoting civil disagreement and dialogue. Becca Kearl, the executive director of Living Room Conversations, which was founded in 2010, began by asking everyone to pull out their smartphones and, using a QR code, contribute to a word cloud, using the prompt 'America is….' The screen at the front of the room started to fill with responses like 'under attack,' 'not a democracy,' 'complicated' 'an oligarchy,' 'Trump,' and 'a mess.' But there was also 'an inspiration' and 'my home.' Kearl ran through some discouraging statistics about polarization. But like many in the 'bridging' world, she prefers to emphasize recent research showing that a large majority of people across the political spectrum want honest, fact-based history that honors shared American values without glossing over hard things. 'We feel divided, but a lot of that is coming from the top down,' she said. 'I'm not saying things aren't happening now that are really divisive. But research shows we really want to be united.' What that means on the ground is complicated. One guide asked whether the civic dialogue approach downplays the degree to which people from minority groups may feel less empowered to speak, if they are present at all. (Monticello's visitors, according to its data, skew heavily white, as they do at museum sites as a whole.) Another noted the challenge of navigating the political gap between, say, Charlottesville, which voted 84 percent Democratic in the 2024 presidential election, and Greene County, a heavily rural Republican stronghold only about 20 miles away. Kearl, describing herself as a registered Republican who feels conservative in a national context but 'super-liberal in Utah,' where she lives, said that political identity can be complicated. And for some who are right of center, even well-intentioned efforts by progressive-dominated institutions to reach across the political divide can come off as condescending. 'With conservatives, there's often a sense you are being drawn in to be re-educated, and you are just going to be told how you are wrong,' she said. Dillard reminded the guides that the point wasn't to win a debate or change anyone's mind, but to foster civic connection. 'Do you want to prove a point?' he said. 'Or do you want to make a difference?' Dreams of the Future The following morning, about three dozen students from the University of Virginia and Washington and Lee, a nearby school with a more conservative reputation, arrived for an early test-run of the new tour. 'You're all probably very familiar with Thomas Jefferson,' the guide, Wyatt Falcone, said, kicking things off. But what comes to mind when you think about John Adams? 'Curmudgeon,' one student offered. 'Actually,' Falcone said, 'he had a pretty good sense of humor!' The group, which included some students from campus bridging groups, was primed for dialogue. But there wasn't much time for questions, as Falcone raced to keep the complex story under the tour's one-hour limit. (It clocked in at an hour and 20 minutes.) Stepping into Monticello, with its eccentrically shaped spaces, rich colors and cutting-edge 18th-century gadgets, can feel like entering an Enlightenment version of Willie Wonka's factory. And in the entrance hall, Falcone noted mainstays of every house tour, including a museum-like display of Native American artifacts brought back by the Lewis and Clark expedition and, over the door, the elaborate 'Great Clock' designed by Jefferson, which has been running for more than 200 years. But by the time the group moved into the library, Falcone was deep into the history of the debates of the 1780s over the newly proposed Constitution, and the rifts that began opening over the nature and practice of American democracy. Adams, Falcone explained, believed that the new nation needed a strong executive to contain the class of people who, in every society, would rise above the rest, and seek to accumulate power for themselves. Jefferson, he said, was 'more of an optimist.' 'He believed the American Revolution was the first step in a global revolution that would wipe away the systems and tyrannies of the past and create a new world of freedom and equality,' he said. (Though not for everybody — Jefferson, Falcone noted, was 'horrified' when enslaved Haitians overthrew their masters and established a democratic republic in 1804.) So far, so Jeffersonian. But moving into the bedchamber — where a bust of Adams was tucked into a corner, near the foot of the bed — Falcone described how this civic friendship, and the new democracy's fragile consensus, started to seriously fray. It started with the election to succeed George Washington in 1796, when Adams narrowly defeated Jefferson. And by their 1800 rematch, the brutal politics of the 'factions' that many of the founders had warned against produced what is still seen as one of the nastiest, most bitterly partisan elections in American history. Adams's Federalists accused Jefferson of being an anarchist, an atheist, a traitor and a French spy. Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans, meanwhile, denounced Adams as a warmonger, a monarchist and a tyrant. And then — as fans of 'Hamilton' will remember — the election was thrown into the House of Representatives, where it took more than 30 ballots for Jefferson to prevail. Adams left office in 1801, in the first peaceful transfer of power to a political opponent in American history. But the two men did not exchange a single word for more than a decade. Then, in January 1812, three years after Jefferson had retired to Monticello, a courier — 'probably an enslaved person,' Falcone said — arrived with something unexpected: a letter from Adams. The brief letter included New Year's wishes, and a book written by his son John Quincy Adams, who Jefferson had known as a child. The missives started flying back and forth, and didn't stop. 'You and I ought not to die before we have explained ourselves to each other,' Adams wrote to Jefferson in July 1813. But explaining themselves, Falcone noted, did not mean changing the other's mind. The tour — with its discussions of the partisan press, the deportation of 'enemy aliens,' debates over executive power and racist rumor campaigns — offered plenty of rhymes with our political present, without overtly spelling them out, or telling anyone what to think. Visitors are left to decide what message, if any, they will carry back down from the mountaintop to the messy country below. But Falcone ended the tour with a hopeful line from Jefferson: 'I like the dreams of the future rather than the history of the past.'
Boston Globe
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
To some students, the Declaration of Independence feels a lot like a breakup letter
Across Massachusetts, teachers are trying to breathe new life into the teaching of the Lessons on the events leading up to the birth of the nation have been evolving over the generations as classroom instruction has expanded from emphasizing the teaching of battles, heroes, and the principles of democracy to including more discussion about the role of public activism and the experiences of Teachers also are lecturing less. Instead, they are turning their students into sleuthing historians with assignments that have them digging through historic documents, biographies, and a host of other texts. Advertisement Getting students engaged can be a challenge. 'They kind of roll their eyes when we say we are going to talk about the American Revolution,' said Gorman Lee, social studies director for Braintree Public Schools and education committee chair of Related : Advertisement At Lynn Classical, the class ultimately decided to write two different versions of the Declaration of Independence. One was about a couple breaking up and the other was about an individual choosing independence from another. 'What happened then and how the Founding Fathers came to be is very inspiring,' Ny said. 'It's important to learn and know the history behind where we are now.' Concerns about whether schools are National data indicate the teaching of US history and the principles of democracy are in deep trouble: US history exam. Those scores, which were not broken down by state, represented a decline from the 2018 exam. F. Anderson Morse, executive director the American Revolution Institute of the Society of the Cincinnati, said the state of teaching of the American Revolution is a mixed bag. 'The bad news is they spend a lot less time talking about the Revolution in most schools today … than any of us growing up,' he said. 'There are some textbooks where you will see no more pages devoted to the American Revolution than to the story of Marilyn Monroe.' He added, 'The good news is at least today people are starting to understand more — those who study it — that the American Revolution wasn't just an elitist war. … It's really a citizen's war.' Advertisement Kaylin Gangi, a third grade teacher at Drewicz Elementary School in Lynn, peppered her students with questions about Phillis Wheatley, an African American poet who wrote about the American Revolution. Jonathan Wiggs/Globe Staff Robert Allison, a history professor at Suffolk University in Boston, said he has seen Boston Public Schools pull back on the American Revolution and other history. In the years following the bicentennial celebration in the 1970s, Allison said, BPS and the city's historical organizations started a partnership that enabled students to see famous landmarks from the American Revolution and other historic sites, but the program faded due to busing costs. 'It became this scramble every year and it essentially killed the program,' said Allison, who is chair of Sujata Wycoff, a BPS spokesperson, said the district provides robust instruction on the American Revolution in Grades 5 and 8 and in high school, with an emphasis on having students learn about historical figures from marginalized communities. BPS also is expanding partnerships with historic sites and museums to create more field trips, especially ones focused on the 250th anniversary. 'The BPS History/Social Studies department has worked greatly since the COVID pandemic to bring back place-based learning opportunities ... ones focused on the American Revolution and various other topics in history,' she said in a statement. Related : Massachusetts standards for social studies instruction call for the teaching of the American Revolution in the third, fifth, and eighth grades and in high school. In third grade, lessons on the American Revolution often dovetail with broader units on local communities, which in Massachusetts often have deep roots in the American Revolution, and also emphasize the teaching about people from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, including enslaved and formerly enslaved people, and Native Americans. Advertisement Eighth grade is where the American Revolution is taught more deeply, when students study key ideas about equality, representative government, limited government, rule of law, and natural rights. The pressure on students to grasp those concepts is even more critical now with the arrival of a long anticipated MCAS civics exam for that grade level. Students then receive another dose of the Revolution in high school in US History 1, although teachers say this often is a review since students take the course so soon after the eighth grade. Third-graders Daniel Alvarado Amaya, Carolina De Faria Almeida Ferreira, and Jimena Perez Esteban at Drewicz Elementary School in Lynn worked on a poster about the American Revolution. Jonathan Wiggs/Globe Staff Beth Greenwood, a third grade teacher at Brookline's Lincoln School, said early lessons on the American Revolution and the plight of Colonists often resonate with young students. 'Third-graders are so aware of issues of fairness that is where they connect emotionally,' such as when laws were imposed on the Colonists, Greenwood said. 'They just get so engaged in the American Revolution as a story and the suspense of what will happen next.' At Drewicz Elementary School in Lynn one recent morning, teacher Kaylin Gangi circulated around her third grade classroom as her students created posters about historic figures. Leaning over the shoulders of one group of students sitting at a cluster of desks as they tried to figure out what to write, she attempted to prod them along: 'Tell me a little bit about Phillis Wheatley.' 'She wrote poems,' one student replied. When Gangi eventually asked them about what her poems were about and why she was famous, they struggled with their responses. So she suggested they do a little more research. Eventually, they learned that Wheatley wrote about the American Revolution (siding with the Colonists) and the plight of enslaved people, and was the first African American author to have a book of poetry published. Advertisement 'She's brave,' Olivia Sanh Tarantini, 8, said later on in an interview. 'It would be very scary for me.' The assignment was part of a new 'inquiry-based' curriculum, 'They always groan when I say we are studying social studies and then they get into it,' she said. James Vaznis can be reached at
