- The reasons given by Clinton High School for stopping a chapter of Turning Point this year don’t add up. Students want it. No written policy prevents it from happening now. The Constitution requires it.
Two weeks ago Magnolia Tribune received a tip from two credible sources that a group of students attempted to start a chapter of Turning Point USA at Clinton High School, but school administrators shut down the effort.
We were told by our sources that three separate reasons had been given by school officials, sequentially and at different times, for not moving forward with the club:
- First, that Turning Point USA was too political and divisive to allow on campus;
- Second and subsequently, that a teacher had initiated the club instead of students, in violation of a District policy; and
- Third and finally, when students declared their own interest, that it was too late in the school year to start a new club, in violation of a District policy.
All Three Putative Reasons Raise Serious Constitutional and Legal Questions
The first reason, if established, represents a violation of the U.S. Constitution, the congressional Equal Access Act, and Mississippi’s 2022 SPEAR Act. All three guarantee students the freedom of association in clubs that are oriented around politics, public policy, and social issues. This includes clubs that some people might find to be too political or divisive.
The second and third reasons, even if not pretense, could present constitutional challenges, as well.
If students want to associate with each other in a TPUSA club — and even the District admits they do — where the idea came from is constitutionally irrelevant. Humans are allowed to be inspired by other humans in exercising their constitutional and legal rights. Furthermore, as a practical matter, every club has a teacher sponsor who helps guide students. In fact, it’s a requirement. One man’s encouragement might easily leech over into another man’s “teacher-led.”
The third reason given on the timing of starting a club could provide what is known as a “reasonable time, place, and manner” legal defense for the District. But that analysis would hinge on whether there’s an actual policy in place spelling out when clubs must be approved by, whether any such policy is sufficiently tailored to protect the freedom of association, and whether it is consistently applied.
All evidence suggests that no such written policy exists.
Pick a Reason, Any Reason
After receiving the information from our sources, we sent to Dr. Brian Fortenberry, principal at Clinton High School, and Jim Keith, Clinton Public School District attorney, a public records request and a series of questions (copied in their entirety immediately below).
Subsequent to sending these requests, we posted on social media channels that we had information that the effort to start the club had been shut down by the school. As that post went viral on Facebook and X, Clinton residents began reaching out. They advised that they had spoken to school officials in response to the social posts. These individuals relayed the explanation provided to them — that efforts to start the club in September violated a District policy that required a club to be approved in the preceding school year to become active.
This was the third and final reason originally supplied by our sources, so it was not surprising. No mention of the other two reasons was offered by these concerned citizens, however. If the surrogates were to be believed, the District had “picked a reason.” It spread across social media as if written on stone tablets handed down to Moses.
But Does Such a Policy Actually Exists?
The same night, we endeavored to read the handbook for Clinton Public School District’s secondary schools. There was no mention of any deadline to form a club. Next, we delved into a voluminous set of Clinton Public School District policies posted on the District’s website. Again, no mention of any deadline to form a club could be found.
So, the following morning, we emailed Dr. Fortenberry and Board Attorney Jim Keith a third time seeking clarification on our previous request for policies relied upon by the District — namely, whether there was actually a written policy that precluded a club from being approved in September? We asked — presuming such a written policy existed, was consistently applied, and enforceable — if Turning Point USA would be approved as a club for next year? Finally, we asked for confirmation that the club “was not initially turned away because of a perception of its political nature.” Silence. Given the opportunity to say “no actually your understanding is wrong,” they said nothing.
Instead of sending answers to these questions, the Clinton Public School District put out a statement. While it did not reference us by name, it indicated that our social media posts were “incorrectly reported.” Then the District’s statement, ironically, proceeded to explain why the effort to form the TPUSA chapter had, in fact, been stopped this year. It offered the latter two of the three reasons that Magnolia Tribune had originally been supplied by our sources:
Reason No. 2: Does the ‘teacher-led’ explanation pass the smell test?
The District’s statement relied on the explanation that a teacher had initiated the club idea instead of students, citing a District policy that requires clubs to be student-led (Reason No. 2). The statement, however, also explicitly acknowledged that students independently expressed interest in forming the club.
The Clinton School District, in a partial response to the public record request served by Magnolia Tribune on September 18th, provided screenshots of emails between a member of its faculty and students about the potential of starting a Turning Point USA club. The teacher’s email noted that she was reaching out to the students identified because of interest they had expressed in similar ideas (“patriotism and healthy debate”) and that “the initiative to start the [Turning Point USA] chapter would need to be student led.” She invited the students on the email to share it with others “who might be interested in spearheading this kind of club at the school.”
This email has been treated as proof of a policy violation online, but in reality, the clear language suggests a teacher trying to provide an avenue for students to lead, not someone trying to force feed kids.
In that vein, the District’s produced public records show responsive emails from multiple students volunteering to lead the effort to start the club, discussing planning, and identifying other students to participate. The group planned to meet with the teacher on Tuesday, September 16th.
A third source told Magnolia Tribune that the teacher’s email became widely circulated and not everyone who received the forward was happy with the idea of Charlie Kirk’s organization on campus. That source indicated that circulation made its way into the hands of at least one set of parents who were ideologically opposed to Turning Point USA and who voiced complaints to Clinton High’s administration, prompting school leaders to step in to shut down the effort for being “too political.”
On Monday afternoon, September 15th, the teacher abruptly informed the students they would no longer be meeting. In response, a student asked when the meeting would be rescheduled. The following morning, the teacher advised that the meeting would not be rescheduled and students interested in the club should speak directly to Dr. Fortenberry.
The District produced no written communications between the teacher and Dr. Fortenberry. However, something clearly happened from the weekend, when the students and the teacher were excitedly discussing plans to launch a chapter, and the teacher’s late Monday afternoon (Sept. 15th) “we are not going to meet tomorrow” email.
That she then directed students to communicate directly with Dr. Fortenberry the following morning, September 16th, suggests communication, in some form, had taken place between the teacher and Fortenberry.
Following the teacher bowing out, students began directly communicating with Dr. Fortenberry their interest in forming the club, and according to our sources, were stymied.
The produced emails seem to validate this information. A series of student emails culminated in one pressing Dr. Fortenberry for written reasons on why the effort was being denied on September 16th:
Again pressed by a student on Thursday, September 18th for a policy prohibiting the formation of the club, Dr. Fortenberry sent the only email of his produced by Clinton Public Schools on Friday, September 19th, citing the policy against teacher-led organization. This came a day after the issue went public and the same day of the District’s statement. This email also confirms intermediary verbal communications.
It is notable that this email from Dr. Fortenberry, explaining that teachers could not lead club efforts, was not sent to the teacher in question. Instead, it was sent to a student who took the initiative to lead in the start up of the club even after the initial would-be teacher sponsor suddenly backed away.
A defect, if any, that came from the teacher emailing students (and explicitly telling them they would need to lead the effort to start a chapter) surely is cured by students stepping up to do so independent of the teacher.
That is, unless it is the position of the Clinton Public School District that a club is forever foreclosed from existing, no matter how badly students want it, if the thought first crossed a teacher’s mind. Such a position would be patently absurd and would not pass constitutional muster. Even the District’s statement seemingly recognizes this by shifting to Reason No. 3 and next steps with students.
Reason No. 3: Unwritten ‘Practice’
This brings us to the unwritten “practice” excuse for not moving forward this year. The District’s statement describes discussing with students its “practice” of admitting newly approved clubs to be “fully operational” the following school year (Reason No. 3). (Is there a partially operational interim?)
Unlike the “teacher-led” reason given in the District’s statement, there was no cited written policy to support the idea of a deadline to submit new clubs for the current school year.
Again, we could not find any written policy in our own investigation the night prior to the release of the District’s statement — something we advised both Fortenberry and Board Attorney Jim Keith of well before the District released its statement, and brought up again, after the statement had been released.
When Keith sent us a copy of the District’s statement on September 19th, I replied: “I take it from this statement that there is no actual written policy on club approval or timing.” He did not respond to this point.
And when the Clinton Public School District partially responded to our public record requests — which included a request for any written policy they were relying on — a written policy was not produced related to club approval and timing.
Take Them at Their Word or Tie the Ribbon
When Clinton Public School District released its statement, several news outlets ran with it without even a modicum of critical thinking, accepting it at face value.
It is possible our sources are incorrect — that the club being too political was not the initial reason for denying it — though much of what those sources otherwise shared has since been validated by the District, itself.
It’s also possible that what we have called Reason No. 2 and Reason No. 3 here were after-the-fact CYA — that a school administrator got spooked by something that looked “political,” overreacted when the club drew some complaints, and stepped in “it.”
People can draw their own conclusions about who to believe and what information is credible.
What can’t be argued with a straight face is that the District was on its way to approving the Turning Point USA club a couple of weeks ago. It wasn’t. That reporting was correct.
It’s also truthfully irrelevant now whether the real reason it was shut down initially was political — unless someone wants to sue.
But it stands to not be naive in these situations more broadly. No government official will ever openly admit that they said or did something that represents a violation of the Constitution, federal law or state law. Instead, what you almost always hear is “we really wanted to help them, but they did not follow our unwritten process.” “Process” is the great tool of an obstinate bureaucracy.
What is relevant now is:
- That at this point students want to lead this club, not a teacher. That’s not a violation of “Policy JAB”;
- There’s no apparent written policy to stop them from forming now; and
- The Constitution, federal law, and state law likely require a path to approval.
Let me for a moment express empathy for a school leader concerned with the unity of his or her school, being pulled in different directions by parents and students. Could a club like Turning Point USA cause division? Sure. But one goal for schools should be to teach students how to constructively engage in civil debate, not run from it. Lord knows we need that now more than ever.
It also seems abundantly clear that whatever the ministrations and posturing leading up to this moment, if students want a Turning Point USA chapter at Clinton High School, there will be one. And that’s a good thing for those of us who believe in the foundational rights of freedom that make our country exceptional.
This is a developing story. We are awaiting additional documents from the Clinton Public School District.
Russ Latino
