About five years ago, Tucson Unified School District got rid of its Mexican American Studies program, but on Monday, the case hit the federal courts to see if TUSD’s decision was unconstitutional.
KVOA | KVOA.com | Tucson, Arizona
Our friends at Three Sonorans are providing excellent coverage of the trial. Check them out here. In addition, Roque Planas of HuffPost is at the trial live tweeting it. Here is what he has shared so far since Monday:
Today the trial over an Arizona law used to ban a controversial Mexican-American studies program begins. I'll be covering all week.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 26, 2017
A handful of lawyers from a Wall Street firm working pro bono joined the legal team representing students in Mexican-American studies case
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 26, 2017
Lawyer for Arizona says former superintendent Huppenthal had a legitimate pedagogical interest in calling for elimination of Spanish
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 26, 2017
Huppenthal might have overstated his stance on Spanish in the "rhetorical street fighting that is blogging," but it's "not a racist belief"
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 26, 2017
Acosta explains what term 'raza' means.
AZ lawyer moves to strike as 'expert linguistic testimony'.
Judge: sustained.
Audience chuckles.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 26, 2017
John Huppenthal is taking the stand after brief recess.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 26, 2017
Most of Huppenthal's examination touched on decision to ignore the results of the audit he commissioned. Writing a report.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
AZ lawyer: 'Caca de vaca' — does that mean cow excrement?
Acosta: Yes.#MASTrial— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
'Anything a public information officer puts out should be taken with a grain of salt.' — John Huppenthal. Have to agree.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
(but usually officials don't say that to take issue with their own press releases)
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Here's what happened on the first day of the Mexican-American studies ban trial https://t.co/WtnkNVUiXU
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Here’s some more details about #MASTrial, not all of which is covered in first report.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
The heart of the #MASTrial is basically a question about who’s being racist, and whether alleged racism was illegal.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Students argue law restricting ethnic studies was discriminatory in conception and application.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
State of AZ argues that the MAS ban was a responses to ‘legitimate pedagogical concerns,' allegedly breeding resentment against whites
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
AZ lawyer described #MAS classes as a ‘Marxist pedagogy of oppression’ that portrayed America as a ‘racist society’
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
AZ’s cross-examination of #MAS co-founder Curtis Acosta focused on that.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Lawyer Rob Ellman presented Acosta with materials used in #MAS classes, including a speech by Che Guevara…
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
…and asked if they bred resentment against whites. Acosta repeatedly said ‘no.’
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Acosta: ‘It would have been offensive to me personally because I’m biracial and I love my mom’
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
There was a brutally tedious interrogation about Acosta’s teaching of Shakespeare’s ‘The Tempest.’
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Won’t bore you with details. Acosta partly used it to discuss colonialism. State of AZ thinks that’s illegal, I guess.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Unclear what Judge Tashima thought about cross-exam of Acosta.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
But Judge is not particularly interested in understanding how effective the banned #MAS program was.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Judge appears more narrowly focused on allegations of discriminatory intent.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
In which case, the program’s effectiveness is not as important as why Arizona officials acted the way they did.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
To win the discrimination claims, MAS supporters don’t have to show AZ officials are raging racists.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
It’s enough for them to prove a pattern of bias.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Former Superintendent Huppenthal’s testimony today is key to students’ case, for a few reasons.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
One of the ways to prove a pattern of discriminatory intent is to show departures from normal procedure
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Yesterday, lawyer Steven Reiss really harped on that, reviewing the audit Huppenthal ordered in great detail
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
The audit concluded the #MAS classes didn’t violate statute and praised elements of the classes. Critical thinking, etc.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Reiss also questioned Huppenthal about campaigning to ‘stop La Raza.’ Huppenthal acknowledged he did.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
Huppenthal famously made those statements using a pseudonym to comment on blogs. It’ll come up today.
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
More later. In the meantime, here’s the most detailed court filing laying out the case against Arizona: https://t.co/NQSYjotT3S
— Roque Planas (@RoqPlanas) June 27, 2017
This is what Planas shared as well—the docket to decide whether Arizona’s ethnic studies restrictions are constitutional.
