Case Summary
In the case, Henderson v. School District of Springfield R-12, two employees sued the school district, Springfield Public Schools in Missouri, over mandatory diversity and inclusion training that they claim compelled them to agree with certain statements about race. A federal court ruled in favor of the school district. Worse, the court ordered the employees to pay the school officials’ attorney’s fees.
The employees appealed those decisions to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Appellants, Brooke Henderson, and Jennifer Lumley are public school employees who allege that they were intimidated from engaging in any criticism of the DEI training, and that they were even compelled to state that they agreed with the training. Springfield cloaks the training in an innocuous word—equity—yet the training casts white people as the source of all racism. It forced upon the Appellants that they express a specific viewpoint on a matter of public concern—racism.
But forcing employees to accept the idea of “white privilege,” and the idea of viewing students differently based on skin color cannot—and must not—be pursuant to public employees’ duties. Public employees’ cannot have as one of their duties the obligation to engage in discrimination.
Additionally, compelling speech on a topic outside the scope of an employee’s job description should not be permitted. While schools can of course “compel” history teachers to teach about history, that is fundamentally different than forcing employees to express a specific personal viewpoint on a controversial topic.
Join the Fight
Since 1977, MSLF has fought to protect private property rights, individual liberties, and economic freedom. MSLF is a nonprofit public interest legal foundation. We represent clients pro bono and receive no government funding. Make your 100% tax deductible contribution today and join the fight.
Moreover, even if the School District did have an interest in trying to reduce tension in the district, this training did exactly the opposite. It created tension! And potentially exposed the district to legal liability under federal civil rights laws.
Springfield forced its educators to speak on divisive matters of public importance—racism. But everyday Americans have a right to keep their personal viewpoints, even if they work for public schools. If the school district isn’t thwarted in this case, all teachers could become merely ideological puppets.
MSLF and the Texas Public Policy Foundation submitted an Amicus Curiae Brief in support of Henderson and her colleagues, because we believe it simply cannot be true that promoting racism is part of an educator’s official duties. The Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion training the educators were subjected to asks them to view students based on immutable characteristics—skin color. Teachers cannot be forced to promote unlawful directives.
Case Timeline
June 2023: MSLF Files Amicus Curiae Brief
September 2024: Speech claim by teachers forced to praise DEI denied; $312k attorney fee award against Southeastern Legal Foundation reversed.
