Public School Officials Block ‘Ave Maria’ at Graduation

Public School Officials Block High School Wind Ensemble from Playing Instrumental ‘Ave Maria’ at Graduation Due to Church/State Fears

Rutherford Institute Attorneys Sue Superintendent Over Student’s Right to Perform Religious Instrumental Song

For Immediate Release: June 27, 2006
Press Contact: Nisha N. Mohammed
Ph: (434) 978-3888, ext. 604
Pager: 800-946-4646, Pin #: 1478257
E-mail: Nisha@Rutherford.org

SEATTLE, Wash.—Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have filed a First Amendment lawsuit in defense of the rights of a member of a high school wind ensemble to perform an instrumental arrangement of “Ave Maria” at the school’s graduation ceremony. The case centers on a school official’s refusal to allow the senior high woodwind ensemble to perform their choice of an instrumental arrangement of German composer Franz Biebl’s “Ave Maria” at the school’s graduation ceremonies. In the complaint, which was filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, Wash., Institute attorneys charge that the school superintendent’s unfounded concerns about the religious nature of the piece and subsequent move to veto the ensemble’s decision to perform the piece at their graduation ceremony violated the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of the senior members of the woodwind ensemble.

“This case is a perfect example of the ridiculous extremes to which school officials will go in their efforts to sanitize our nation’s public schools of anything even remotely related to Christianity,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “Schools cannot ban performances and restrict students’ right to free expression whenever those forms of expression might have some minimal connection to religion. This is a case of clear and open hostility towards religion—Christianity, in particular.”

Traditionally, school officials at Henry M. Jackson High School in Snohomish County, Wash., have allowed the senior members of the high school’s top performing instrumental group, the woodwind ensemble, to choose a song from their repertoire to perform as a farewell during graduation ceremonies. Having performed Franz Biebl’s “Ave Maria” at a public concert in 2004, which was attended by students, parents, faculty and members of the public, the wind ensemble unanimously chose to perform it again at their graduation ceremony on June 17, 2006, because they felt its aesthetic beauty and peacefulness would be appropriate for the tone of the ceremony.

The senior members proposed to perform Biebl’s piece instrumentally; no lyrics or words would be sung or said, nor did the senior members intend that any lyrics would be printed in ceremony programs or otherwise distributed to members of the audience. However, despite the absence of lyrics, Dr. Carol Whitehead, superintendent of Everett School District No. 2, refused to allow the ensemble to perform “Ave Maria” at their graduation ceremony because she believed the piece to be religious in nature. In response, attorneys for The Rutherford Institute filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the superintendent on behalf of graduating senior Kathryn Nurre, a saxophonist with the wind ensemble and one of the 17 senior high students who selected “Ave Maria” for the graduation ceremony. As Institute attorneys pointed out in their lawsuit, the superintendent’s actions violated the students’ rights to freedom of speech, to be free from hostility to religion and to equal protection under the law.

----

Founded in 1982 by constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

Professor Under ‘Investigation’ at California Institute of Integral Studies

 

by Tara Sweeney

The California Institute of Integral Studies (CIIS) has a specific persona—founded in 1968, it is a private, accredited institution advocating an “integral approach to education.” Its mission is to “embody spirit, intellect, and wisdom in service to individuals, communities and the Earth.” These ideals draw students and faculty to CIIS, but faculty members also likely find assurance in CIIS’ broad commitments to academic freedom, which guarantee them “freedom in the classroom in presenting their subject,” and “freedom in the selection of textbooks … and other teaching materials.”

 

But as today’s press release shows, those commitments to academic freedom have recently been left by the wayside. In March, psychology professor Leland van den Daele assigned his “Lifespan Development” class an article that he wrote in 1970 called “Preschool Intervention Through Social Learning for Disadvantaged Children,” published in Howard University’s Journal of Negro Education. A student complained that the article was racist to CIIS’ Diversity Action Team, which initiated a review of the article. Students then met with CIIS President Joseph Subbiondo to contend that the article represented “institutional racism.” Subbiondo notified the CIIS community via e-mail that the “incident” would be resolved by an investigation into Van den Daele’s use of the article and his course. The entire psychology doctoral program is also now up for review.

 

Van den Daele’s defense is worth hearing. Van den Daele wrote the article in 1970 after having worked with African-American children in Mississippi. The article was peer-reviewed, found to be credible, and then published by Howard University. Students reportedly objected to the article’s use of the term “negro”—though it was an acceptable term when the article was written in 1970. Van den Daele even told the Diversity Action Team that part of his intention was to show “historical change since the publication of the document.”

 

Instead of listening to these explanations and realizing that sometimes teaching involves revisiting and rationally discussing terms and opinions that have fallen out of popular favor, CIIS launched an attack on Professor Van den Daele. This is a case of political correctness run amok, and FIRE hopes that the investigations will end.

Sticking With DeWine

—Hugh Hewitt

Ohio Senator Mike DeWine faces a tough re-election campaign in the Buckeye State, primarily because of his participation with John McCain in the Gang of 14 and his support for Social Security benefits for illegal aliens who may one day become citizens based upon their contributions to the trust fund made while in the country wrongly.

Yet DeWine has a lifetime American Conservative Union rating that is very high and has voted for every Bush judicial nominee including Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, for the Bush tax cuts and for border fencing. And his opponent is a hyper-liberal congressman certain to parallel Barbara Boxer and Ted Kennedy in his votes should he win.

I, too, have disagreed with Senator DeWine on occasion, but he is a solid pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, pro-property rights vote and he deserves our support for re-election. With more Supreme Court nominees likely in the near future, the GOP majority in the Senate simply cannot be thrown away.

 

Hugh Hewitt is the host of the Hugh Hewitt Show.

Hugh Hewitt is the author of Painting the Map Red: The Fight to Create a Permanent Republican Majority.