White Teacher Suing Over 'Antiracism' In Evanston Schools Pushes For Discovery

EVANSTON, IL — Nearly three years after a white middle school teacher filed a federal civil rights lawsuit over claims of racial discrimination in Evanston-Skokie School District 65, her attorneys asked a judge to schedule discovery in the case.

Stacy Deemar, 52, of Wilmette, has been a part-time drama teacher at Nichols Middle School in Evanston since 2002.

In June 2021, Deemar filed suit against her employer, alleging violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits race-based discrimination, and the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.

According to Deemar's suit, the district's focus on antiracism and racial equity initiatives has resulted in discrimination against white staff and students. Her complaint cited modifications to a 2nd grade theater production and disciplinary responses to children she accused of assault.

In court filings, Deemar's attorneys argue District 65 policies emphasize racial differences and reinforce ideas of race-based essentialism.

They cite the use of the book "White Fragility," racially segregated staff meetings and surveys, lesson plans involving discussions of "whiteness" and "white privilege," professional development programs that teach that "treating everybody equally" is a form of racism, and various "privilege walks" in which participants take steps based upon their skin color.

"In these ways, District 65 did not just assign materials to read and reflect upon; it implemented race-based policies and procedures designed to stereotype and stigmatize, and it relied on reading and training materials to reinforce those policies," Deemar's attorneys argued. "By assigning characteristics to racial groups, District 65 is not simply offering students access to ideas about race; it is establishing an orthodoxy that stigmatizes racial groups."

District 65 attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the case in August 2021.

They contended that the First Amendment provides school boards with broad authority to determine the curriculum of schools.

The conduct alleged by Deemar does not meet the threshold for what actually constitutes a hostile work environment, according to the school district, plus the part-time drama teacher did not even attend many of the activities cited in her suit.

Two months later, Deemar responded and sought to strike a declaration from Assistant Superintendent Stacy Beardsley asserting that Deemar had not taken part in any racial affinity group meetings, never attended any voluntary diversity seminars and had only been required to do a two-day Beyond Diversity training.

Beardsley also said that Deemar typically did not even attend Nichols staff meetings at which equity was discussed, and that no federal funds support her salary.

Nearly a year later, U.S. District Judge Robert Dow requested further briefings from both sides in the case to address specific questions, including whether they were aware of any other case that considered the viability of a hostile educational environment claim brought by a teacher under either Title VI or the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

In the September 2022 order, Dow also asked the attorneys what factual support Deemar has for her hostile environment claim if a judge were to find that the "mere act of assigning reading materials that [she] finds offensive" does not violate her 14th Amendment rights.

Judge John Tharp took over the case after Dow was appointed to be counselor to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. And attorneys for Deemar and the school district filed their responses to the earlier judges inquiries in October and November 2022, respectively.

The drama teacher's supplemental briefing argues that the district "knew, and was deliberately indifferent to, racial hostility by staff members." It also looks to differentiate between mere curriculum decisions or isolated incidents and pervasive practices imposing a "pall of orthodoxy" on the classrooms.

On the other hand, the school district's attorneys argue in their supplemental briefing that curriculum and professional development activities fall well within a school board’s discretion. They also argue that Deemar lacks standing to make a First Amendment challenge on behalf of students, and that no teacher has the right to bring a Title VI hostile educational environment claim.

Since then, Deemar's attorneys provided several additional filings with Tharp regarding other federal court decisions they say support their claims, including the Supreme Court case that struck down affirmative action at Harvard University and a federal court challenge to Seattle's racial equity training program.

The judge has yet to rule on the district's motion to dismiss the case.

On Wednesday, Deemar's legal team filed a motion asking the judge to set a schedule for discovery on the case.

"While Ms. Deemar awaits this Court’s rulings, she remains employed at District 65 under conditions that are materially unchanged and that, as pled, routinely subject her to unlawful racial stereotyping, discrimination, and a hostile educational environment," attorney Braden Boucek said.

Boucek said District 65's attorneys are not opposed to holding a status conference in the case but does not want to begin the process of discovery — where both sides exchange information about witnesses and evidence.

"[Deemar] believes that engaging in discovery at this time will speed the ultimate resolution of this case once the pending motions have been decided," Boucek said.

Related:

• 'Anti-Racist' Teaching Is Racist, Unconstitutional, District 65 Teacher Alleges In Lawsuit
• Racist Voicemail, Vandalism Follow Teacher's Lawsuit, District Says
• 'White Victimhood': Teacher's Critical Race Theory Suit Condemned
• Drama Teacher's Discrimination Suit Falls 'Woefully Short,' District 65 Says In New Filing