NYC Schools Chancellor Implored to Enforce Political Neutrality After Anti-Zionist ‘Teach-In’ for Kids

Teachers who promoted a “Palestine Teach-In” for New York City schoolchildren on Martin Luther King’s birthday violated the city’s policy on political neutrality on school grounds and violated free speech protections afforded to teachers as government employees, according to a new letter sent by nonprofits to Public Schools Chancellor Kamar Samuels.

The event, organized by a group which calls itself “NYC Educators for Palestine,” targeted “kids ages 6-18,” according to social media screenshots included in the groups’ letter. New York City officially prohibits attempts to indoctrinate students with views held by schoolteachers, having adopted a “politically neutral learning environment” policy in June 2009.

That policy must be enforced, said the two nonprofits, StandWithUs and the North American Values Institute (NAVI), who wrote to Samuels.

“NYCPS [New York City Public Schools] teachers’ speech can be considered government speech, as opposed to private speech, depending on the context. The teachers involved in advertising and speaking at the event are proactively sharing their status and training as NYCPS teachers to attract attendance,” the groups said. “Doing so risks misleading families as to whether the event is sponsored or supported by the DOE [Department of Education].”

“NYCPS teachers’ speech — even private speech off of school grounds — can be limited if it would interfere with the ‘effective operation of the school,'” the letter continued. “NYCPS teachers, as city employees, may not use their positions of authority to influence students. Whether or not they are literally in the classroom, students are considered ‘captive audience’ members to their teachers.”

The Algemeiner has asked the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), which represents over 200,000 teachers and other education professionals in collective bargaining negotiations, to respond to the letter and has not heard back. At least one UFT caucus promoted the event.

The UFT has been criticized for violating political neutrality before. According to a report published in September by the Defense of Freedom Institute (DFI), the union has gone from fostering popular support for anti-Zionism among students to seeking cover from government by placing one or more of its fellow travelers in high office. To that end, the UFT endorsed the New York City mayoral candidacy of Zohran Mamdani in July, calling the avowed socialist and Hamas sympathizer a potential “partner.”

“The historical record shows that, whatever their shortcomings, previous generations of teacher-union leaders stood up to antisemitism in K-12 schools on behalf of their Jewish members and promoted strong US support for Israel in the face of existential attacks on that country,” the report stated. “Now, antisemitic activists grossly dishonor that legacy by weaponizing teacher unions to spread antisemitism, intimidate Jewish teachers, and recast the classroom as a battlefield against the West.”

Other states have faced similar challenges, as public school teachers have seemingly assumed that they have academic freedom and free speech rights enjoyed by professors.

In December, a California judge weighed in on this issue while striking down a challenge to the state’s new K-12 antisemitism law, a measure which established a new Office for Civil Rights and other protections for Jewish students.

In the suit, a teacher argued that the K-12 antisemitism law was “hastily written” and “singled out for punishment” anti-Zionist viewpoints. She also criticized the law because she said it “empowers anyone to file a complaint claiming classroom content and instructional materials criticize Israel and Zionism,” preventing teachers “from freely discussing these critical issues.”

In her decision, Judge Noël Wise, appointed by former US President Joe Biden in 2024, said that even if what the teacher and LA Educators for Justice in Palestine argued was true, it failed legally for asserting public teachers’ right to unfettered free speech, which does not exist for government employees while they are at work. Teachers may comment on matters of public interest, she explained, citing past jurisprudence by the US Supreme Court, but they cannot interfere with government’s advancing its “legitimate interests.” When they speak in the classroom or on a public school campus, Wise stressed, they do so not as private citizens but as state officials speaking “with the voice of the government” — a fact which allows government to steer or proscribe what is said on its behalf.

She continued, “As public school education belongs to the government, the government may regulate Teacher Plaintiffs [sic] speech to accord with the government’s education goals. It is of no significance that the curricula and the attendant speech required to teach it may advance a single viewpoint to the exclusion of another.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.