From: nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com   
      
   On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 01:24:08 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701    
   wrote:   
      
   >On Feb 15, 2026 at 4:56:31 PM PST, "shawn"    
   >wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 00:11:20 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> These protocol-communist teachers are allowed to tweet and protest and   
   scream   
   >>> obscenities at and about the police all day, they can even put anti-ICE   
   >>> propaganda on the walls of their classroom, but one teacher takes the   
   >>> opposite   
   >>> viewpoint and he loses his job.   
   >>>   
   >>> How is that even remotely legal? The government is now telling its   
   employees   
   >>> that they can only express their political opinions in public if they   
   support   
   >>> the government's views?   
   >>   
   >> I don't know the rules in IL. but if it's a right to work state (what   
   >> a name) there's nothing illegal about it. Though I suppose the union   
   >> could fight it but probably won't.   
   >   
   >When the employer is the government, the 1st Amendment becomes involved.   
      
   But the claim won't have anything to do with what he said. Just the   
   community reaction which they will claim something like it is creating   
   a hostile work environment and a distraction from their mission of   
   teaching the students. Likely unjustified but an easy work around to   
   get rid of the teacher.   
      
      
   >>> Either prohibit political activism for all school staff or allow it   
   >>> regardless   
   >>> of opinion. Can't have it both ways. Not legally, anyway. Heidorn should   
   >>> contact FIRE or the IFF, see if they will take his case. I'd say the ACLU,   
   >>> but   
   >>> they rarely take a case these days if the client isn't a far-left   
   >>> 'progressive'.   
   >>>   
   >>> ----------------------------------   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> https://nypost.com/2026/02/15/us-news/james-heidorn-speaks-o   
   t-after-losing-career-over-two-word-online-post/   
   >>>   
   >>> A veteran Chicago-area gym teacher was pushed out of his job over a   
   two-word   
   >>> social-media post in support of ICE and calls the experience devastating   
   and   
   >>> surreal.   
   >>   
   >> To be clear it wasn't the post. It was the community reaction to the   
   >> post that got him fired. Which is certainly unfair   
   >   
   >Not just unfair, it's what the Supreme Court calls a heckler's veto and has   
   >been very clear that it's not a valid excuse for government suppression or   
   >punishment of speech.   
      
   Doesn't stop them from doing it and by the time it gets resolved in a   
   court everyone will have moved on.   
      
   >> if that is all he   
   >> did, but also understandable as I'm sure the school just wanted the   
   >> controversy gone and this was the quickest solution.   
   >   
   >Too bad. The 1st Amendment's protections do not wax and wane based on what is   
   >convenient for government administrators.   
   >   
   >>> James Heidorn, a "beloved" longtime educator at Gary Elementary School in   
   >>> West   
   >>> Chicago, came under heavy fire by hysterical community activists and local   
   >>> lawmakers when he wrote "GO ICE" on Facebook last month in response to a   
   news   
   >>> story about local cops pledging to cooperate with immigration enforcement.   
   >>>   
   >>> "This process has been professionally and personally devastating and   
   >>> surreal,"   
   >>> Heidorn told Fox News Digital on Sunday. "I've spent 14 years building my   
   >>> career, pouring my heart into teaching kids, building relationships and   
   being   
   >>> a positive role model. To see it all upended over two simple words where I   
   >>> expressed my personal support for law enforcement felt like a severe blow   
   to   
   >>> my career."   
   >>   
   >> He was also clearly oblivious to where he lived/taught and how people   
   >> are reacting to any mention of ICE. Of course a  Hispanic community   
   >> would react badly to saying such a thing.   
   >   
   >Again, such things are not even a part of the legal analysis. Heckler's vetos   
   >are not a valid reason for government punishment of speech. Among other   
   >things, that leads to exactly this situation, where only one side of an issue   
   >is allowed to speak freely.   
      
   But by the time those legal issues are resolved it won't matter. I   
   mean maybe the teacher will win some money but he will have gotten   
   another job, likely in more friendly state to his view on ICE. Instead   
   of being able to go back to his job at the school where he had made   
   all of those connections. It's the sad fact that our legal system   
   always moves slowly.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)