Opinion ID: 78271
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Statements in Connection with the Removal Decision

Text: The Eleventh Circuit ha[s] not hesitated to look beyond the stated reasons for school board action. Virgil, 862 F.2d at 1522 n. 6. While the majority finds that the School Board majority[ ] [made] consistent statements that it was removing Vamos a Cuba from the school library shelves because of factual inaccuracies, [Majority Opinion at 1227], I find little factual support for this conclusion in the record. Instead, I find numerous statements that demonstrate that other motivations were at work. The record is rather clear that from the beginning of the removal process, the primary motivation for removing Vamos a Cuba was the favoring of one particular political viewpoint over another. A parent's complaint launched the review process. The parent, Juan Amador, complained that [a]s a former political prisoner from Cuba, I find the material to be untruthful because [i]t portrays a life in Cuba that does not exist. [R:19:296] (emphasis added). Amador's objection was that the book was not based on his perspective, that of the Cuban exile. The merit or truth of [his perspective] is not the issue.... Tragically, that point-of-view is based on real life experiences that members of the Cuban Community and their families have painfully endured in Cuba before coming to this country, and which many who have remained continue to endure under an oppressive totalitarian regime. ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1284. The issue instead is the state's imposition of what shall be the orthodox view of Cuba  the First Amendment does not permit that one perspective officially dominate the discourse. The record provides palpable support for the district court's conclusion that School Board members banned the book not because of inaccuracies per se but because the book failed to make a negative political statement about contemporary Cuba. For example, School Board member Frank J. Bolanos described certain passages of the book as distortions and, after each distortion, he added his own comments on the subject matter, which he labeled as reality. Each reality demonstrates ideological opposition to the Castro regime. For example, Mr. Bolanos called the passage, The people of Cuba eat, work and study like you, [ Vamos a Cuba: 5], a distortion. His corresponding reality was: Nothing could be further from the truth. The people of Cuba survive without civil liberties and due process under the law and receive 10 to 20 year prison sentences for simply writing a document or voicing an opinion contrary to the party line. People are told where to work. They lose their job if they do not follow the dictates of the communist party. Children are indoctrinated and forced to chant Castro's greatness in class. ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1251. He also labeled the passage, White rice is the most common food in Cuba. Black beans are eaten. Arroz con Pollo is another favorite dish, [ Vamos a Cuba: 12], a distortion. His corresponding reality was: Food is rationed; people stand in line for hours to ask for their measly ration only to be told they ran out. Children stop receiving their milk ration at age six. ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1251. He called the passage, The major celebration in Cuba is `Carnival.' It is celebrated on July 26th, [ Vamos a Cuba: 26], a distortion. His corresponding reality was: The annual commemoration of July 26th is the symbolic observation of the rise to power of Castro's communist, totalitarian regime. It is a day of mourning for most Cubans. Cubans celebrate the 20th of May and the 28th of January, to celebrate their independence from Spain and the birth of Jose Marti, Cuba's greatest national hero. ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1251. Lastly, he labeled the passage, The celebrations in Cuba are a mix of African and Catholic roots, [ Vamos a Cuba : 27], a distortion. Mr. Bolanos' stated that in reality: Historically, Castro's regime has prohibited or chastised those that engage in religious practices, including the Catholic Church and other organized forms of religion. Religious leaders, including Jehovah's Witnesses have been imprisoned. A famous cry while facing Castro's firing squad was Viva Cristo el Rey (long live Christ the King). ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1251-52. Mr. Bolanos argued that the book was rife with distortion because it omitted negative political information about the Castro regime, including omissions regarding political subjects such as civil liberties, due process, freedom of speech, government indoctrination, food rationing, and religious freedom. While Mr. Bolanos' viewpoints may be correct, I find no support in the law for the state requiring a book to carry a political viewpoint. The majority questions my discussion of Mr. Bolanos' remarks. [Majority Opinion at 1215 n. 13.] My analysis should not be understood as questioning the truth or accuracy of his remarks. Indeed, life in Cuba is as bad as Mr. Bolanos makes it out to be. I analyze Mr. Bolanos' distortions and realities to point out that his statements are concerned with the exclusion and inclusion of political statements from a particular viewpoint. The majority also faults me for putting the words distortion and reality in quotation marks, finding that this punctuation somehow means that I do not believe the truth of the statements. The majority mistakes my meaning. I use the quotation marks to designate that these were Mr. Bolanos' statements, statements which, contrary to the majority's contention, evidence that the School Board did not consistently state that it was removing the book because of inaccuracies. I am attempting to determine whether the School Board's proffered reason for removing the book was pretextual, and nothing more. Mr. Bolanos described the book as hurtful and insulting to both our Cuban-American community and those Cubans still living on the island under oppressive conditions. ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1251. He criticized the School Board's book review process as one that would not satisfy the segment of our community that is outraged, that feels discriminated against by this book. [April Transcript, 73:3-73:11.] Some exiles want the discourse to reflect their plight, and they are outraged because the book does not conform to this message. Several School Board members referred to their Cuban birth and their experience as exiles as explanations for why they found the book offensive. For example, School Board member Logan asserted that she wanted the book removed as somebody who suffered [in Cuba] firsthand. [April Transcript, 69:20-69:22.] School Board member Hantman prefaced her opinion by saying: I am a Cuban American. I was born in Cuba. And as the other board members said, my family, and my father and mother lost everything they had worked for. [April Transcript, 80:13-80:22.] She later stated, I suffered and my family suffered with the rise of Fidel Castro. [June Transcript, 22:17-18.] School Board member Perez also demonstrated her motivation for objecting to the book when she remarked that the book is especially damaging to the sensibilities of this community. [April Transcript, 62:7-62:9.] The sensibilities to which she referred are those sensibilities that are hostile to the Cuban government and are intolerant of contrary, less hostile, views. She compared Vamos a Cuba to books about pornography ..., devil worship and other offensive things like that. [April Transcript, 60:9-60:12.] School Board member Barrera acknowledged the accuracy of the picture on the cover of Vamos a Cuba showing children in their school uniforms  to the average person it is just kids in school uniforms. [June Transcript, 11:10-11:11.] But, he continued, as a Cuban, and to the Cuban American community, ... that [picture] represents what is there today, which is the dictatorship of Fidel Castro. So, yes, we are offended. Even though it doesn't say anything, but the cover of that book is offensive to us as a community. [June Transcript, 11:11-18.] Mr. Barrera objected because the book merely displayed the picture and neglected to comment negatively on the school uniforms and their symbolic connection with Castro. Mr. Barrera was also bothered by the portrayal of Cuba as normal  just kids in school uniforms. [June Transcript, 11:10-11:11.] To present Cuba as a normal place is unacceptable to exiles because it negates the very reason for their exile and struggle. The adamant rejection of normalcy accounts for the strong desire to remove from the library shelves a book that treats Cuba as the same as any other country. ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1284 n. 37 (quoting [R:19:281.]). Similarly, District Materials Review Committee (DMRC) members Balcells and Dr. Usategui explained that the books present a portrayal of life in Cuba for young children as being normal, benign, and politics-free-with a focus of trying to draw human parallels showing that life is relatively the same as in other countries. [R:19:457.] Their criticism is grounded in a portrayal of Cuba as normal and apolitical. The majority responds that to say the evidence reflects improper motive confuses interest with motive. [Majority Opinion at 1224.] It argues that Cuban Americans are more interested than others in removing false books about Cuba, and that they are offended only by the inaccurate portrayal of life in Cuba. [Majority Opinion at 1224.] The distinction between motive and interest has little merit in this context. The various comments made by School Board members, as I discussed above, reflect that it was not only inaccuracies that offended them. To the contrary, the cover of the book, which Mr. Barrera admitted was accurate, was offensive because of the Cuban school uniform's symbolic connection with that which he abhors. [4] The record supports the conclusion that the School Board was not merely interested in removing a book full of inaccuracies; it was motivated to remove a book that symbolically represented something with which it disagreed. Some members of the Cuban American community attended the School Board meetings and demonstrated their intolerance to messages that fail to conform to their personal experiences. One member of the DMRC, Ronald Bilbao, described the environment at one of the meetings, as very scary. [Supplemental Bilbao Declaration at p. 3.] He noted that it was packed with people from the community who kept interrupting. Security guards were standing by. I felt intimidated and I was afraid to speak freely at the meeting. [ Id. ] When a DMRC member said something about the book being accurate, some would whisper communist and hiss. [ Id. ] For example, when the DMRC discussed the passage regarding the Carnival celebration at page 26 of the book, which says, Cuba's biggest celebration is called Carnival. It is held on July 26. People dance and sing at this festival, a member, Mr. Rivera, said that this was inaccurate because [the book] doesn't also say that people who live there are required to go to the festival. [ Id. ] Mr. Bilbao replied that as far as [he] could tell the book is accurate, it just doesn't add that people have to attend. [ Id. ] In response to this comment, Mr. Rivera got angry with Mr. Bilbao and members of the community hissed at Mr. Bilbao and called him a communist. [ Id. ] He spoke only that one time at the meeting because he felt intimidated. [ Id. ] Members of the audience at the meeting kept pressuring [Mr. Bilbao] and telling him that the book was offensive and hurtful to the Cuban community. [ Id. ] The Superintendent of the Miami-Dade County School System also noted the intense political pressure from the community: I have listened carefully to the citizens who have come to address the School Board ... and have been struck by some disturbing signals of intolerance, which left unaddressed could threaten the progress and the harmony that has marked our community over the last decade. Divisive rhetoric only damages the fabric of our society. However, respectful, open and frank discussions about our differences and cultures lead to understanding and build bridges of acceptance. There can be no doubt that the issues raised at recent Board meetings must be dealt with in ways that reflect respect for different opinions and sensitivity to views held by both the majority and the minority.... There is no easy fix to the complex issues we are contemplating; we can teach children that even the most twisted knots can be untied by citizens willing to work together for solutions that recognize many legitimate interests and concerns. Memorandum from Superintendent of Schools Crew to Deputy Superintendent Dunbar, May 22, 2006, [R:19:35-26.] The intensity of the feelings in the Cuban American community in Miami was not lost upon the district court: Nothing written here is intended to cast doubt upon the heartfelt point-of-view expressed by Mr. Bolanos and his supporters. Tragically, that point-of-view is based on real life experiences that members of the Cuban Community and their families have painfully endured in Cuba before coming to this country, and which many who have remained have continued to endure under an oppressive totalitarian regime. ACLU, 439 F.Supp.2d at 1284. But a sensitivity to the horrors of the Castro regime does not permit state-sponsored censorship of other viewpoints, as the district court noted: [M]any have come to this nation, and continue to do so today, for the opportunity to live in freedom under the protection of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. The quintessential freedom of speech may not be sacrificed on the altar of beliefs no matter how firmly those beliefs are held. In this nation, we do not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because some in the community find it offensive or disagreeable. Id. There was prior precedent supporting the district court's decision to grant the motion for preliminary injunction. A Miami museum had held an auction of art created by artists who had not renounced the Castro regime or continued to live in communist Cuba. Cuban Museum of Arts and Culture, Inc. v. City of Miami, 766 F.Supp. 1121, 1122 (S.D.Fla.1991). Outraged by the museum's tolerant attitude toward contemporary Cuba, the auction was held amidst hostility and threats in the Miami community. Id. One of the paintings was purchased and burned in the streets as a crowd chanted its opposition to the artists. Id. A bomb exploded under the automobile of a director of the museum. Id. Members of the museum's executive committee were pressured to resign, and those that did not endured McCarthy-like allegations of communist inclinations and sympathies. Id. Eventually, following years of controversy, a Miami city commission decided not to renew the museum's lease. Id. at 1124. The museum brought an action to enjoin the city, claiming the controversial art was subject to First Amendment protection. Id. A district court enjoined the city from evicting the museum, holding that the controversial art was subject to First Amendment protection and the city's asserted grounds for evicting the museum were either minor concerns or a pretextual basis upon which to remove the museum. Id. at 1129. The court found that the city commission appear[ed] to have fallen victim to the local community's intolerance for those who chose to exhibit artwork by artists who expressed a contrary political viewpoint to the Castro regime. Id. at 1126. Similarly, here the School Board, a politically elected body, was faced with intense community pressure. A member of the Miami community confirmed at a School Board meeting: There is a narrow group of Cuban Americans, a small group, a small sector, very powerful, politically strong that imposes their will on the Cuban community and everybody else in Dade County to fear, to threat, to intimidation. [R:19:310:14-310:19.] School Board member Robert Ingram illustrated the inordinate pressure the School Board was under to remove the book when he said that if the members of the School Board did not vote to remove the book, they can't walk out of here. If they don't vote for it, they can't go home, they might find a bomb under their automobiles.... [R:19:430:16-18.] As in Cuban Museum of Arts and Culture, [e]ven if [the School Board members'] personal feelings were properly set aside, [the School Board] was obviously influenced by the local community's outrage and public outcry over a book that failed to reflect politically orthodox views toward Cuba. 766 F.Supp. at 1126. The evidence also shows that personal feelings were not always put aside; indeed, School Board member Hantman explained that her decision to ban the book was grounded firmly in [her] commitment to stand with the Cuban American community, [of] which [she is] a very proud member. [June Transcript, 21:17-19.] She further stated that she would not be doing her job as a Cuban American if she did not vote to remove the book. [June Transcript, 24:21-23.] The record contains observations by educators, most of whom were themselves employed by the School Board, who consistently assured the Board that whatever omissions and inaccuracies there were in the book were not significant enough to remove the book for a legitimate pedagogical reason. One School Board member explicitly admitted this: The 22 professional educators who reviewed this book have affirmatively determined that [the book does not have serious, material, irrevocable and clear inaccuracies and biases], therefore, we are here today in essentially a political process. [June Transcript, 34:23-35:2.] Furthermore, [t]he record should reflect that this issue has been driven by Phone-A-Thons, phone banking, radio, newspaper articles, e-mail campaigns, letter writing campaigns.... We are rejecting the professional recommendation of our staff based on political imperatives that have been pressed upon members of this board. [June Transcript at 35:5-35:15.] Certainly a School Board is a political body that must serve its constituents. However, the School Board also took an oath to uphold the Constitution. No amount of political pressure can trump the First Amendment of the Constitution.