Appleton Area School District sets rules for speeches
APPLETON – After the Christian themes of an Appleton school board member’s graduation speech stirred controversy, the Appleton Area School District will require speakers to submit their speeches for administrative review and swear under oath that they’ll stick to the script.
To a nonprofit that called for them, the new guidelines are a “good solution” to determining whether a speech is appropriate in a public school setting.
To the pastor who prompted them, they’re “criminal.”
During his speech at North High School’s graduation ceremony in June, the Rev. Alvin Dupree, an Appleton school board member, said his source of strength is his faith and relationship with Jesus Christ and invited fellow Christians to applaud in agreement.
Dupree, founder and minister of Family First Ministries, also told students to “never succumb to the pressure of being politically correct” or “another man’s norm,” led a moment of silence for a student who died before graduating with the class and closed his speech by changing the district’s prepared statement of “best wishes” to “God bless.”
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, a Madison-based national nonprofit that seeks to preserve the constitutional separation of church and state, wrote a letter to the Appleton school district in objection to Dupree’s speech and the district’s “failure to take appropriate action” against him.
A group of 29 Appleton North graduates and students also wrote a letter to the district expressing frustration with Dupree’s use of “Christian themes” throughout the speech.
Both FFRF and the students called on the district to ban Dupree from speaking at district-sponsored events, to develop a policy that would require commencement speeches to be reviewed before the ceremony and to cut a speaker’s microphone if the approved script is not followed.
Although the district’s response doesn’t specifically preclude Dupree from speaking at district-sponsored events, Ryan Jayne, a staff attorney with FFRF, said the organization is pleased.
The speech this summer marked the third time FFRF contacted the district about Dupree in the last two years, and the organization has characterized Dupree’s actions as “abusing his position as a school board member.”
“We think the district did the right thing,” Jayne said, “and we expect that there won’t be any problems with Dupree speaking at district events in the future, because under these guidelines we don’t expect that he’ll be allowed to speak.”
Calling the guidelines “systematic bullying” and a “direct attack on the First Amendment,” Dupree told The Post-Crescent he believes one of the intentions behind the protocol is to prevent him, specifically, from speaking at future district events.
“To me, that is criminal and it’s wrong and it doesn’t lead to tolerance,” he said. “I’m not trying to force anyone of any faith or any religion or belief to think as I do — I think everyone should be allowed to freely express who they are as an individual.”
Appleton schools Superintendent Judy Baseman said the administration worked with its attorney, Kirk Strang, who has expertise in educational and constitutional law, to set clear expectations and be more consistent in inviting speakers to district events.
Baseman said the guidelines will be applied “consistently across any speakers.”
“It comes back to one of the main pillars of our district’s strategic plan, which is to provide an inclusive, safe environment for all, while also balancing individual rights,” she said. “That’s critical to our role as a public school and we’re confident that these guidelines will accomplish that for our students, families and staff.”
The guidelines
While it’s relatively common to require remarks delivered at school district-sponsored events be approved by administrators, Jayne said he’s never seen guidelines “as strict and broad” as those just created in Appleton.
The guidelines emphasize that being invited to speak at a district event is a privilege and not a right, and therefore guidelines do not limit individual rights.
The guidelines are also “not a mandate,” according to the document, because the district and superintendent can enforce them at their discretion.
As students and FFRF requested, the guidelines require that speeches be written and submitted to the superintendent for review at least two weeks in advance.
The guidelines also state that speakers must disclose whether they intend to wear jewelry, clothing or accessories that could be understood to communicate a message to the audience when the speech is given.
Speakers must also swear in writing, with a notary, and under oath that they will deliver the speech as they wrote it and not wear materials that hadn’t previously been approved for the event. “Minor and immaterial variances” — unplanned statements like “thank you” or “it’s nice to be here” — would not be considered violations.
In the event that a speaker refuses or fails to deliver a speech as written, the superintendent may “take remedial action, in his/her discretion, to address any behavior exhibited by a speaker during his/her speech, as the Superintendent deems necessary or appropriate,” according to the document.
And, the decisions of the superintendent will be final, according to the document.
Dupree said he takes issue with the level of authority given to the superintendent, current and future, under the guidelines, as he or she “isn’t a lawyer, district attorney, judge or police officer trained in constitutional or other state and federal laws.”
“I think it’s a total disgrace for such procedures to be in place, because it has the potential to be used at the sole discretion of one person to discriminate against anyone that doesn’t line up with that position,” he said.
Anthony LoCoco, a deputy counsel with the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, said that’s the organization’s main concern as well — the discretion a superintendent has to assess a speech’s appropriateness. He called the document “troubling.”
The Milwaukee-based conservative law firm also wrote to the school district in June, arguing that Dupree didn’t violate the First Amendment, and new policies regarding graduation speeches could be in violation of freedom of speech rights.
“This often leads to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination,” LoCoco told The Post-Crescent. “We’re concerned by the guidelines and we’re in the process of assessing their constitutionality.”
Dupree also said he feels it’s wrong that the administration created a procedure like this without school board approval. Because they’re not “mandated,” the guidelines can’t be considered a policy and therefore don’t need school board approval.
Baseman said the school board is aware of the protocol.
“We’re moving forward together as a team,” she said.