What is Biden Hiding?



[INSIDE JW]

Delaware Court Orders State to Provide More Detail on Deal to Keep
Secret Senate Biden Docs

[[link removed]]
The University of Delaware is sitting on more than 1,850 boxes of
records from Joe Biden’s years as a senator – and doesn’t want
the public to see them.

So, two years ago we went to court. This month our lawsuit advanced
another step when the Delaware Superior Court ordered
[[link removed]]
the university to provide under oath additional information justifying
its decision to keep secret its agreement to house and restrict access
to Biden’s records.

Here are the events leading up to this decision.

Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation filed
[[link removed]]
a July 2020
Delaware Freedom of Information Act lawsuit after the University of
Delaware denied our requests on April 30, 2020, for all of Biden’s
Senate records and for records about the preservation and any proposed
release of the records, including communications with Biden or his
representatives (_Judicial Watch, Inc. v. University of Delaware_
[[link removed]]
(No. N20A-07-001 MMJ (Del. Super.)).

We appealed
[[link removed]]
an
adverse lower court ruling and the Delaware Supreme Court returned
[[link removed]]
to
the case to the lower court.

The university then filed an affidavit, citing no documents or other
specifics, stating that no state funds were used on the university’s
“matters or undertakings” regarding Biden and that the Biden
Senate papers were never discussed at any meetings of the university
full Board of Trustees.

We challenged the sufficiency of the affidavit, and Superior Court
Judge Mary M. Johnson ordered the University to provide more
information:

[T]he remand mandates that the inquiry does not end with the
University’s filing of an Affidavit swearing to information
previously provided. The Supreme Court directed reconsideration of
whether the University satisfied its burden of proof.

***

The Court finds that the generalized statements in the Affidavit do
not meet “the burden to create a record from which the Superior
Court can determine whether the University performed an adequate
search for responsive documents.” The University of Delaware must
articulate who (identified at least by position within the University)
provided the information: that no State funds were spent by the
University; that no salaries of any University personnel involved in
the custody and curation of the papers were paid with State funds;
that no State funds were spent on the University’s email system for
communications between University personnel and Biden representatives;
when such inquiries were made; and what, if any, documents (other than
the gift agreement) were reviewed.
“It's absurd we're having to sue the University of Delaware just
to learn how they're using taxpayer dollars,” said Daily Caller News
Foundation Managing Editor Michael Bastasch. “Rest assured, with
Judicial Watch’s help, we are optimistic we will uncover the truth
about why they are seemingly keeping President Biden's records a
secret.”

Joe Biden is being protected by the University of Delaware, and the
courts are growing impatient with the shell games. Of course,
President Biden could end the dispute by simply releasing the details
about his Senate records. What is Biden hiding?

PUBLIC SCHOOL CHARGES BOYS FOR ‘MISPRONOUNING’ TRANS CLASSMATE

The transgender extremist agenda has come to small town America. Kiel,
Wisconsin, which describes
[[link removed]]
itself as “The
little city that does BIG things,” has turned typical eighth grader
behavior in a music classroom into a federal case, elevating along the
way a non-word, “mispronouning,” into a civil rights offense.
Here’s a look
[[link removed]]
from our _Corruption Chronicles_ blog at what might be coming to your
town.

In a case that illustrates the madness surrounding the governmentwide
push for transgender rights, a public school district in Wisconsin
charged three boys with sexual harassment for failing to use a female
classmate’s chosen pronouns (they/them). The Kiel Area School
District, situated in a town of about 4,000, accused the three eighth
graders of “mispronouning” in a music classroom. Then the school
launched a complaint under Title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972
[[link removed]],
which protects people from discrimination based on sex in education
programs or activities that receive federal funds. In a Notice of a
Formal Complaint of Sexual Harassment
[[link removed]]
to each boy, the district writes the following: “After being
informed that a student’s preferred pronouns were ‘they/them’
[name redacted] engaged in conduct based on gender identity toward the
student including using incorrect pronouns and conduct that was
harassing in nature.”

Fortunately, a conservative group, Wisconsin Institute for Law &
Liberty (WILL), got involved and the school district recently dropped
its federal investigation under immense pressure from the community
and attorneys at the legal nonprofit. Since the “mispronouning”
and subsequent investigation occurred weeks ago, local news outlets
have reported that the school received bomb threats. “After the
story became local and national news, the district received numerous
threats referencing the Title IX investigation,” according to one
local story
[[link removed]].
The article continues: “Due to bomb threats, the school district
went virtual through the end of the school year. The threats then
expanded to city hall, businesses, facilities and homes of school
officials. The messages were emailed to police, news media and school
district members. The district was forced to delay its graduation
ceremony out of concern for the community’s safety.” In another
report
[[link removed]]
a local LGBTQ advocate said that “homophobia, transphobia and
anti-LGBTQ violence exists in all communities.”

The reality is that Title IX usually covers serious crimes such as
sexual assault, rape, stalking and inappropriate touching. “None of
that—or anything even close to it—was alleged in the complaint,”
WILL, the charity representing the boys pro bono, points out in a
statement
[[link removed]].
“While there is a catchall for “unwelcome conduct” that is “so
severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively
denies a person equal access to education,” the mere use of a
biologically correct pronoun, without significantly more, does not
count, and if it did, it would violate the First Amendment.” The
legal group proceeds to write that schools can and should deal with
teasing and bullying but the use of incorrect pronouns alone is not
punishable. The school district also failed to follow its own policy
and Title IX procedures by not providing a detailed notice of the
allegations before questioning the minors. “The District initiated
its investigation and conducted interviews without first providing
additional details or giving the boys and their families time to
prepare,” according to WILL.

Further illustrating the absurdity of the case, the attorneys
representing the boys reveal in a May letter
[[link removed]]
to the district superintendent that “mispronouning” doesn’t
constitute sexual harassment under Title IX because gender identity is
not even included within the definition of sex in the decades-old
measure. Not surprisingly, the Department of Education is currently
working to amend Title IX to add it. None of the other conduct
described in the statement from the music teacher comes remotely close
to sexual harassment, the boys’ lawyers write, adding that the
statement acknowledges the whole class expressed frustration with
remembering pronouns. “At most, the statement describes a few
isolated incidents of teasing and arguments between the 8th grade
students in question,” WILL attorneys write. The letter also
discloses that the student in question has also teased the boys by
calling them numerous names and yelling at them for not using
they/them pronouns even when the boys were not talking about her.

This month the school district finally dropped the case against the
boys, writing in a letter to the school community
[[link removed]]
that it “considers this matter closed.” The letter mentions the
media attention and threats related to the case and reiterates that
the Kiel Area School District prohibits all forms of bullying and
harassment in accordance with all laws and “will continue to support
ALL students regardless of race, color, religion, national origin,
ancestry, creed, pregnancy, marital status, parental status, sexual
orientation, sex (including transgender status, change of sex or
gender identity), or physical, mental, emotional or learning
disability (“Protected Classes”) in any of its student programs
and activities, consistent with Board policy and the law.”

FEDS GET SETTLEMENT FOR ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL WHO REFUSED TO ENFORCE
DRESS CODE

With nothing else to do, your federal government is stepping in to
regulate school dress codes, as our _Corruption Chronicles_ blog
reports
[[link removed]].


The Department of Justice (DOJ) has helped a public-school
administrator get a hefty settlement after being reprimanded then
dismissed for refusing to enforce the student dress code because he
felt it discriminated against African Americans. Additionally, the
taxpayer-funded school district in a Columbus, Ohio, suburb will pay
to conduct a variety of annual anti-discrimination and
anti-retaliation trainings with materials pre-approved by the feds.
The DOJ claims the school district violated Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 when it “discriminated and retaliated” against
the administrator, who is African American, for opposing
discriminatory employment practices. Under the consent decree
[[link removed]]
announced this week, the district will pay the administrator, Amon-Ra
Dobbins, $200,000 and clean his employment record. “No employee
should face discipline or reprisals for filing a complaint regarding a
dress code policy that may be causing harm to Black students,” the
federal prosecutor who handled the case for the DOJ’s Civil Rights
Division said in a statement
[[link removed]].


Dobbins was an assistant principal in the Groveport Madison Local
School District’s only high school. He began his career in the
district with an enrollment of about 5,600 as a teacher in 2001 and
was promoted to assistant principal in 2017. His duties as assistant
principal included addressing discipline-related issues, resolving
student conduct violations, creating a discipline strategy with other
administrators, ensuring other administrators and teachers
consistently enforced school and district student conduct rules,
supervising the high school’s security staff and interpreting
district policies regulating student behavior such as the dress code.
The complaint
[[link removed]],
filed by the federal government on Dobbins’s behalf, centers around
the district dress code, which states the following: “No hoods,
hats, coats, bandannas, and sunglasses may be worn in [the] school
building or class[.]”

The code also prohibits head coverings known as du-rags and bonnets,
which are scarves worn on the head with the ends tied together at the
back. “They are typically worn by African-American males to preserve
their hair’s pattern after brushing it,” according to the DOJ
complaint. “Similarly, bonnets are typically worn by
African-American females to preserve their hairstyle, especially
during sleep.” In his role as the high school administrator in
charge of discipline, Dobbins grew concerned that the dress code was
discriminatory towards black students, the complaint states. The
assistant principal “noticed a pattern of teachers
disproportionately referring African-American students for discipline
because of the District’s interpretation of the Dress Code to
prohibit du-rags,” the court document says, adding that Dobbins was
also concerned the dur-rag prohibition resulted in teachers and
administrators disproportionately enforcing the dress code against
African American students wearing the prohibited head scarfs. “As a
result, Dobbins believed the District’s interpretation of the Dress
Code was a targeted, discriminatory practice that violated the rights
of African-American students and required him to enforce, as part of
his job duties, discrimination towards them,” according to the
complaint.

District officials gave Dobbins a written reprimand after visiting the
campus and seeing students wearing du-rags. The notice reminded the
administrator that permitting du-rags and bonnets was an example of
failing to follow the Board of Education’s policies and procedures.
Dobbins blew off the notice, instead advocating for a change to the
dress code so that African American student would no longer be
subjected to discipline for wearing du-rags and he would not be
required to disproportionately discipline them based on their race. He
continued to allow the head scarfs, the district put him on
administrative leave and did not renew his contract. The Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that
enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, investigated
Dobbins’s discrimination claims and referred the case to the DOJ.
The agency points out in its complaint that the vast majority of
administrators, teachers and staff in the Groveport Madison Local
School District are white and that Dobbins was only one of two
“non-white administrators” and the only African American.

Dobbins is currently teaching a course called “multicultural mastery
[[link removed]
at a private college
in Ashland, Ohio. Here is the course description: “During this
course the participants will examine the urban experience and
multicultural views to help establish anti-racism mindsets. As we dive
deeper into the context of how trauma is a universal human experience
that demands care and attention and how it can be managed through
specific practices and approaches.”

Until next week…





[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


<a
href="[link removed]"
target="_blank"><img alt="WU01"
src="[link removed]"
style="width:100%; height:auto;" /></a>

[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2022, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]