Image by Michal Jarmoluk

A report from the American Center for Law and Justice has confirmed that an “environment of intimidation” created by a radical leftist teacher for students in a school district has been ended, following its demand letter to the school district.

The location of the district and the identities of the student and teacher involved were not released, as the dispute never rose to the level of a court action.

But the ACLJ, which for years has battled on behalf of constitutional rights, confirmed the dispute was resolved satisfactorily.

Its own reporting confirms it was a “major victory” on behalf of the student, “whose constitutional rights were systematically violated.”

When it became aware of the weaponization of a classroom against conservative students, the ACLJ wrote to the district insisting on corrective action.

The teacher in question “spent up to one-third of the 90-minute class” delivering her own politics, in an “aggressive” fashion, and attacking President Donald Trump.

“This teacher also engaged in a deeply troubling pattern of viewpoint discrimination that strikes at the core of First Amendment protections. She used her classroom as a political forum for discussion but then shut down our client, a Christian student with conservative beliefs, whenever she disagreed with the teacher and supported President Trump,” the ACLJ reported. “The classroom became a forum where students who agreed with the teacher’s political views were encouraged to speak, while those with conservative perspectives were systematically suppressed. The teacher went beyond merely sharing opinions into creating an environment of intimidation that prevented students from expressing alternative viewpoints.”

Included in the teacher’s wild claims were about Trump establishing “concentration camps” for African Americans – using time that could have been focused on “actual course material,” the report said.

“We were prepared to file a lawsuit in federal court on the student’s behalf to ensure that this conduct stopped. We are pleased that our legal demand letter got the attention of the district before the deadline we provided. It responded and resolved this situation to our client’s satisfaction,” the legal team said.

Among the district’s commitments are that it will “comply with the requirements of the First Amendment and district policy.”