Yongken’s reform goals are threatened by the Board of Education


by James C. Sherlock

Yesterday, Jim Bacon was relatively pessimistic about the prospects for Governor Yongkin and his administration to roll back the regulations.

The number of regulations not provided for by federal or state law is small.

Delegating in law is not the only test of regulation.

The current regulations of the Virginia Board of Education have bypassed the provisions of Virginia’s statutes to challenge parental authority and completely redesign standards and curricula to serve the progressive faith.

Most of these regulations can be modified to remove or change the more radical sections and still respond to the Basic Laws as written.

The problem is that the current board membership will not do that. I recommend the governor replace her membership.

One particularly infamous regulation among the many written in response to Virginia Law § 22.1-23.3. Treating transgender students. Policy.

This law consists of a numbered list of items to be covered in the subsequent regulation. Regulation 29 pages long It challenges both common sense and parental authority over their children.

Some paragraphs, like this one, are highly controversial:

Gender identity is an innate characteristic that most children express by the age of five to six (Lamb & Lerner, 2015).

School departments will need to consider student health and safety in situations where students may not want their parents to know their gender identity, and schools should address this on a case-by-case basis. If a student is not willing or able to safely share with their family about their gender identity, this must be respected.

In the event that the parents or guardians of a minor student (under 18 years of age) do not agree to the student’s request to adopt a new noun and pronouns, school departments will need to determine whether or not they will honor the student’s request. Desires to continue to use the student’s legal name and gender specified at birth, or develop an alternative that is respectful of both the student and parents.

There is no distinction in Virginia’s statute between schools’ treatment of kindergarten and high school seniors. It may be the only such regulation in a country that does not.

For example, Utah regulation, which addresses the same issue, recognizes that young children need parental guidance:

Parental involvement is processed on a case-by-case basis. The first consideration is the health and safety of the student, while also making sure that the student’s gender identity is confirmed in a way that maintains privacy and confidentiality.

Grades K-5: Generally, a parent or guardian will notify the school of an impending transition. However, it may be appropriate to communicate with the parent of an elementary school student if school personnel believe that an issue of gender identity or expression presents itself in the school and creates difficulty for the student.

Grades 6-12: In general, there is no need for notification from students’ parents about gender identity, sexual expression, or transfer to students.

We note here that Utah Regulation compatible with Virginia Law. The Virginia Board of Education has gone beyond complying with directly challenging parents about their rights to direct the life choices of their 5-year-olds.

This is just one example, but the board of education has proven itself Until now The most extreme Virginia policy boards.

I have previously suggested that the Governor, as a non-lawyer, appear to me to have power Virginia Law § 2.2-108. Dismissal of members of certain councils, committees, etc. To remove and replace members of the Board of Education. Others here disagree.

The governor can, and if he requests the opinion of the new attorney general, determine his authority in this matter. I expect he will use all the tools at his disposal.

But both the governor and the parents will face a strong tide if he does not oust the current members of the ultra-radical board.


Leave a Comment